After all, "responsible" falls within the definition of liable (it's even mentioned in the opinion). I don't think it takes a damned P number to realize that these should be able to be used interchangeably.

In fact, let's take this one step further...

If, indeed, the legislature provided for the exact wording to be used on the appropriate insurance documents for the exclusion to be valid, why did they not enclose said verbage in quotations?

After all, they do so in their required wording for CPL education certificates.

MCL 28.425j(1)(c) states:

(c) The program provides a certificate of completion that states the program complies with the requirements of this section and that the individual successfully completed the course, and that contains the printed name and signature of the course instructor. Not later than October 1, 2004, the certificate of completion shall contain the statement, "This course complies with section 5j of 1927 PA 372."