Mich. Comp. Laws » Michigan Compiled Laws / Chapter 691 / Act 351 of 1994
Michigan Compiled Laws

Mich. Comp. Laws § 691.1663 (2026)

Injury, death, or property damage; liability.

✓ current as of July 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section MI-LEGlegislature.mi.gov JustiaChapter on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

EQUINE ACTIVITY LIABILITY ACT


Act 351 of 1994


691.1663 Injury, death, or property damage; liability.

Sec. 3.

    Except as otherwise provided in section 5, an equine activity sponsor, an equine professional, or another person is not liable for an injury to or the death of a participant or property damage resulting from an inherent risk of an equine activity. Except as otherwise provided in section 5, a participant or participant's representative shall not make a claim for, or recover, civil damages from an equine activity sponsor, an equine professional, or another person for injury to or the death of the participant or property damage resulting from an inherent risk of an equine activity.

History: 1994, Act 351, Eff. Mar. 30, 1995

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 10 cases (4 in the last 5 years), 2000–2025 · leading case: Woodman v. Kera LLC, 785 N.W.2d 1 (Mich. 2010).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Woodman v. Kera LLC, 785 N.W.2d 1 (Mich. 2010). · cites it 2× “" [57] MCL 691.1663 provides: Except as otherwise provided in [MCL 691.”
Amburgey v. Sauder, 605 N.W.2d 84 (Mich. Ct. App. 2000). · cites it 3× “The trial court ruled that plaintiff was a participant engaged in equine activity within the meaning of the EALA and, as such, *231 her claim against defendant was barred by the terms of the act, which provides in pertinent part: Except as otherwise provided in section 5, an…”
Beattie v. MICKALICH, 784 N.W.2d 38 (Mich. 2010). · cites it 4× “Section 3 of the EALA (MCL 691.1663) provides: Except as otherwise provided in section 5, an equine activity sponsor, an equine professional, or another person is not liable for an injury to or the death of a participant or property damage resulting from an inherent risk of an…”
Beattie v. Mickalich, 773 N.W.2d 748 (Mich. Ct. App. 2009). · cites it 4× “116(C)(10), arguing that § 3 of the EALA, MCL 691.1663, barred plaintiffs claim. In response, plaintiff contended that she had produced evidence supporting her claim under two of the statutory exceptions to the immunity granted by the EALA: § 5(b) and (d), MCL 691.”
20230202_C359740_50_359740.Opn.Pdf (Mich. Ct. App. 2023). · cites it 6× “Defendants respond that plaintiff’s common-law negligence claims are barred by the EALA, which includes the following preclusion of common-law claims in MCL 691.1663: Except as otherwise provided in section 5 [i.”
Gardner v. Simon, 445 F. Supp. 2d 786 (W.D. Mich. 2006). · cites it 2× “Mich. Comp. Laws § 691.1663 . Defendant asserts that she is entitled to summary judgment because Plaintiffs injuries resulted “from an inherent risk of an equine activity,” which the EALA defines as: a danger or condition that is an integral part of an equine activity,…”
Violet Lapeer v. Otsego Cnty. Fair Ass'n (Mich. Ct. App. 2021). · cites it 3× “[MCL 691.1663.] An “equine activity sponsor” is defined by the act, in relevant part, as “an individual, group, club, partnership, or corporation, whether or not operating for profit, that sponsors, organizes, or provides the facilities for an equine activity, .”
Rebecca Goch v. the Edison Inst. (Mich. Ct. App. 2025). · cites it 3× “” Amburgey v Sauder, 238 Mich App 228, 233 ; 605 NW2d 84 (1999), citing MCL 691.1663. Under MCR 2.116(C)(7), “the nonmovant’s well-pleaded allegations must be accepted as true and construed in the nonmovant’s favor,” and the court must also consider “any affidavits, depositions,…”
Samantha Johnson v. Outback Lodge & Equestrian Ctr. LLC (Mich. Ct. App. 2016). · cites it 2× “EALA Section 3 of the EALA, MCL 691.1663, provides that “an equine activity sponsor, an equine professional, or another person is not liable for an injury to or the death of a participant or 2 The manager of Outback testified that a typical question on the quiz might be as…”
Jeff Britten v. Circle H Stables Inc (Mich. Ct. App. 2023). · cites it 2× “” MCL 691.1663. It is not disputed that defendant is an “equine activity sponsor” within the meaning of MCL 691.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.