The Michigan Court of Appeals recently affirmed a lower court’s ruling that the intoxication of a student participating in a fraternity event prevented the now deceased student’s estate from bringing a wrongful death suit.
The plaintiff’s decedent, a college student who belonged to a fraternity, drowned during a river “float-down” event. The plaintiff sued the defendants for wrongful death, alleging negligence caused his death.
In Estate of Morton by Morton v Theta Chi Fraternity, No. 344556, 2019 WL 6173687 (Mich Ct App, November 19, 2019), the appellate court upheld the trial court’s granting of summary disposition to defendants.
The appellate court reasoned “that regardless of the trial court’s stated reasons for granting their motion for summary disposition, they were entitled to summary disposition as a matter of law under MCL 600.2955a.” The appellate court concluded that “reasonable minds could not differ that [the decedent] had an impaired ability to function due to the influence of intoxicating liquor—indeed, the point is undisputed given plaintiff’s theory that [he] drowned only because he was so intoxicated.”
Further, because the plaintiff “presented no substantively admissible evidence to rebut the presumption of impairment (and instead concede[d] it), it [was] ‘established beyond dispute.’”
And finally, the appellate court held that there was “no genuine issue of material fact that as a result of [the decedent’s] impaired ability, he was 50% or more the cause of the ‘accident or event’ that resulted in his death.”
The “St. Clair River Float Down” began in the 1980s as an annual public event, but was outlawed by the U.S. Coast Guard for approximately 20 years before unofficially resuming in 2009. The “float-down” event was outlawed because the St. Clair River is a “deep” “shipping lane,” with a “fast-moving current,” that “can be very dangerous.”
For more information about the case or the “float-down” event, a copy of the opinion can be found here.
Add a comment
Topics
- Civil Litigation
- Product Liability
- Premises Liability
- Consumer Liability
- Consumer Protection
- Property Liability
- Retail Liability
- Litigation Discovery
- Negligence
- Insurance
- Residential Liability
- Fire Claims
- Appellate Law
- Contractor Liability
- Damages Recovery
- General Liability
- Construction Contractors
- Construction Law
- Commercial Liability
- Motor Vehicle Liability
- Water Loss Claims
- Commercial Real Estate
- Personal Injury
- Snow & Ice Claims
- Open & Obvious Doctrine
- insurance policy
- Fraud Activity
- Investigations
- Governmental Immunity
- Contracts
- Traumatic Brain Injury
- Risk Management
- Open & Obvious
- Business Risk Management
- Marine Liability
- Maritime Law
- Artificial Intelligence
- Liquor Liability
- Design Defect
- Industrial Liability
- Lost Earnings
- Video Recording
- Defamation
- Professional Liability
- Independent Medical Examinations (IME)
- Sports-liability
- Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR)
- Auto Liability
- Bankruptcy
- Intoxication
- Judicial Estoppel
- No Fault Liability
- Trucking Liability
- Wrongful Death
- FDA Regulations
- Food Law
- Foodservice & Hospitality
- Real Estate
- Regulatory Law
- Constructive Notice
Recent Updates
- Product Liability Risk Management for e-Bikes and Scooters
- The Missing Feature: When ‘Doing Nothing’ Becomes the Product Liability Theory
- America’s 250th Birthday Celebration Poses Old and New Products Liability Risks
- Is Social Media the Next Frontier in Products Liability Defense?
- Spring Cleaning – Know Your Duties With Snow, Ice Liability
- What damages are recoverable in Michigan when property is negligently damaged or destroyed?
- Businesses can Bolster Lack of Notice Defense by Documenting Premises Inspections
- Avoiding the Premises Liability Trap of ‘Lost’ Evidence
- Appellate Court Faults Construction Company for Halting Work for Nonpayment in Breach of Agreed Upon Contract
- New Scope of Ohio Home Construction Suppliers Services Act Takes Effect



