Wrongful death action under MCL 600.2922; The notice provision for claims against the state; MCL 600.6431; The wrongful-death savings provision; MCL 600.5852(1); Lindsey v Harper Hosp; Comparing Mays v Snyder; Personal representative (PR); Court of Claims Act (COCA)

The court held that the Court of Claims erred by granting defendants-State and State Police summary disposition of plaintiff-PR’s wrongful death action. Plaintiff sued defendants on behalf of his daughter, Hana, who was killed in a school shooting, claiming they inadequately responded to multiple tips received about potential school violence. The Court of Claims granted summary disposition for defendants, finding plaintiff failed to comply with the notice provision of MCL 600.6431, within six months of Hana’s death. On appeal, the court found that “[a]pplying the legal principles established by this Court in Mays to the current matter, the underlying rationale is applicable to the wrongful-death savings provision articulated in MCL 600.5852. This provision is intended to safeguard plaintiffs’ rights in wrongful-death actions, particularly when confronting statutory deadlines.” In addition, in “accordance with the recognized methods of statutory interpretation set forth in Mays, and in light of the Legislature’s clear intent to implement the wrongful-death savings provision in conjunction with the COCA, we conclude that this provision not only extends the filing timeframe but also tolls the statutory notice period albeit any tolling is contingent upon meeting the specific conditions specified within the provision.” As such, the court reversed the Court of Claim’s ruling that granted summary disposition for defendants, and remanded to the Court of Claims, instructing that “further proceedings take place consistent with the conclusions outlined in this opinion.”