Duffy v. Irons Area Tourist Ass'n
300 Mich. App. 542
Mich. Ct. App.2013Background
- Beverly Duffy injured when ATV crashed on a state trail; alleged maintenance negligence by the Tourist Association and the Conservation Club.
- Duffys sued both defendants; Tourist Association sought summary disposition under the Recreational Land Use Act (RLUA).
- Tourist Association argued RLUA shields it unless gross negligence or willful misconduct; trial court granted summary disposition.
- Conservation Club was dismissed earlier; Duffys appealed the dismissal of the Tourist Association claim.
- Court held RLUA does not extend to the Tourist Association because it was not an owner, tenant, or lessee of the land.
- Matter remanded for further proceedings; Duffys prevail on the RLUA issue and other claims are not addressed.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Does RLUA apply to the Tourist Association? | Duffys argue the Association isn’t an owner/tenant/lessee; RLUA shouldn’t apply. | Tourist Association contends RLUA immunizes it for lack of gross negligence. | RLUA does not apply to the Association; no immunity. |
| If RLUA doesn’t apply, can Duffys proceed on traditional premises liability? | Duffys need not plead gross negligence; ordinary negligence suffices. | Without RLUA, Duffys must prove gross negligence under premises liability. | Duffys may pursue theories beyond gross negligence; trial court erred in dismissal. |
Key Cases Cited
- Kruse v Iron Range Snowmobile Club, 890 F. Supp. 681 (W.D. Mich. 1995) (district court extended RLUA to non-owners with control over land)
- Neal v Wilkes, 470 Mich. 661 (2004) (strict adherence to statutory text; no judicial gloss)
- Wymer v Holmes, 429 Mich. 66 (1987) (overruled by Neal; not binding for RLUA interpretation)
- Merritt v Nickelson, 407 Mich. 544 (1980) (premises liability requires possession and control)
- Quinlivan v Great Atlantic & Pacific Tea Co, Inc, 395 Mich. 244 (1975) (lessee assumes responsibility for premises condition)
- Ann Arbor Tenants Union v Ann Arbor YMCA, 229 Mich. App. 431 (1998) (distinguishes possession/control as key to liability)
- Wilson v Thomas L McNamara, Inc, 173 Mich. App. 372 (1988) (recognizes land-character relevance to RLUA; limits defendant class)
- Johnson v Recca, 492 Mich. 169 (2012) (statutory interpretation governs RLUA applicability)