What Qualifies as a Premises Liability Claim in Michigan?

• July 19, 2024

A premises liability claim arises when someone suffers an injury on another person's property due to a dangerous or hazardous condition. In Michigan, these claims follow specific legal rules that determine who bears responsibility, what type of duty the property owner owed, and how fault is shared between the parties involved.

Successfully resolving a premåises liability claim may feel impossible, especially when medical bills are adding up and the property owner or their insurer disputes responsibility. Michigan premises liability law has also changed in recent years, making it more important than ever to partner with a premises liability attorney who can help fight for justice and fair compensation.

Quick Checklist: Do You Have a Premises Liability Claim?

• ✔ Your visitor status: Were you an invitee, licensee, or trespasser?


• ✔ Hazard awareness: Did the property owner know or should they have known about the danger?


• ✔ Failure to act: Did the owner fail to fix or warn about the hazard?


• ✔ Causation: Did the hazardous condition directly cause your injury?


• ✔ Your responsibility: Were you partially at fault for the incident?


• ✔ Open and obvious condition: Was the hazard visible, and how might that affect fault?


• ✔ Damages: Did you suffer medical bills, lost wages, or other losses?


• ✔ Time limit: Are you within Michigan’s 3-year filing deadline?

How Does Michigan Premises Liability Law Define Your Status on the Property?

One of the first questions in any premises liability claim is your legal status at the time of the injury. Michigan law groups all visitors into one of three categories, and the category that applies to you directly affects the level of care the property owner owed you.

Invitee

An invitee is someone who enters a property for a purpose that benefits the property owner commercially. A customer walking into a Southfield grocery store, a diner at a Grand Rapids restaurant, or a shopper at a Sterling Heights retail outlet are all invitees. Property owners owe invitees the highest duty of care, which includes regularly inspecting the premises for hazards and addressing unsafe conditions promptly.

Licensee

A licensee enters the property with the owner's permission but for a non-commercial purpose, such as having friends over for dinner or social guests at a gathering. The property owner must warn licensees about known dangers but is not required to actively inspect for hidden hazards.

Trespasser

A trespasser is someone who has entered property without the owner's consent. Property owners owe the least duty of care to trespassers. The general rule is that owners must not intentionally cause harm, though special rules may apply when children are involved, under the attractive nuisance doctrine.

What Must a Premises Liability Claim Establish?

Every premises liability claim in Michigan involves four core elements. Missing even one of these elements may weaken or eliminate a claim entirely.

Duty of Care

The property owner must have owed you a legal duty based on your visitor status. As noted above, invitees receive the strongest protections, while trespassers receive the least.

Breach of Duty

The property owner failed to meet the standard of care owed. For an invitee, this might mean a failure to inspect, repair, or warn of a hazard. For a licensee, it might mean failing to disclose a known danger.

Causation

A direct link must exist between the property owner's breach and your injury. The hazardous condition must have been a proximate cause of the harm, meaning the injury was a reasonably foreseeable result.

Damages

Actual harm must have occurred. This may include medical expenses, lost wages, pain and suffering, and other losses tied to the incident.

What Role Does Notice Play in a Michigan Premises Liability Claim?

One of the most critical issues in a premises liability claim is whether the property owner had notice of the dangerous condition. Without evidence of notice, even a clearly hazardous situation may not lead to a successful claim.

Actual Notice

Actual notice means the property owner had direct knowledge of the hazard. A landlord who receives written complaints about a broken stairway railing or a store manager who sees a spill and walks away has actual notice of the condition.

Constructive Notice

Constructive notice applies when a hazard existed long enough, or was obvious enough, that a reasonable property owner conducting regular inspections would have discovered it. Michigan courts evaluate factors like the nature of the condition, how long it was present, and whether reasonable inspection practices would have revealed it.

Evidence that strengthens notice claims includes:

• Surveillance footage showing how long a hazard existed


• Written maintenance or repair requests from tenants or employees


• Inspection logs that reveal gaps in routine safety checks


• Witness testimony from people who observed the condition before the incident


• Photographs taken shortly after the injury occurred

A property owner is not automatically liable every time someone is hurt on their property. The burden of demonstrating that the owner knew or had reason to know about the hazard falls on the injured party.

How Did the Kandil-Elsayed Ruling Change Michigan Premises Liability Claims?

For over two decades, Michigan's open-and-obvious doctrine has given property owners a powerful defense. If a hazard was visible enough that an average person would have noticed it, the property owner often owed no duty to warn or protect against it. Courts regularly dismissed premises liability claims at the summary disposition stage based on this defense alone.

The 2023 Shift

In July 2023, the Michigan Supreme Court issued its ruling in Kandil-Elsayed v. F & E Oil, Inc. and Pinsky v. Kroger Co. of Michigan, overturning the framework established under Lugo v. Ameritech Corp. in 2001. The court determined that the open and obvious nature of a hazard is no longer part of the duty analysis.

What Changed in Practice

The open and obvious nature of a condition now factors into two different parts of a premises liability claim:

• Breach analysis: A jury may consider whether the property owner failed to take reasonable steps to prevent foreseeable harm, even if the condition was visible.


• Comparative fault: If the injured person is found partially responsible for not avoiding an obvious hazard, their recovery may be reduced accordingly.

This ruling means that a visible icy patch in a Sterling Heights parking lot or a wet floor at a Grand Rapids storefront may no longer automatically shield the property owner from liability. Instead, a jury weighs all the circumstances.

The End of Special Aspects

The previous framework included a narrow exception called "special aspects," which applied when an obvious hazard was unreasonably dangerous or effectively unavoidable. The Kandil-Elsayed ruling eliminated this doctrine entirely and replaced it with a broader foreseeability standard.

How Does Comparative Fault Affect a Premises Liability Claim in Michigan?

Michigan follows a modified comparative negligence system. Under MCL 600.2959, a court reduces damages by the percentage of fault attributed to the injured person.

The key threshold works as follows:

• A person found 50% or less at fault may still recover both economic and non-economic damages, reduced by their percentage of responsibility.


• A person found 51% or more at fault may not recover non-economic damages like pain and suffering.


• Economic damages such as medical bills and lost wages are still recoverable even above 50% fault, though reduced proportionally.

For example, if a jury finds that an injured shopper at a Tri-County area store was 30% responsible for not noticing a hazard and awards $100,000 in damages, the recovery would be reduced to $70,000.

Comparative fault has taken on greater significance in Michigan premises liability claims since the Kandil-Elsayed decision. Because the open and obvious nature of a hazard now factors into fault rather than duty, juries have a more active role in weighing responsibility.

What Common Scenarios Lead to a Premises Liability Claim in Michigan?

Premises liability claims cover a wide range of situations. Michigan's climate and property types create certain recurring patterns.

Winter Slip and Fall Injuries

Michigan winters create dangerous conditions across sidewalks, parking lots, driveways, and building entryways. Accumulated snow and ice are among the most common causes of premises liability claims in the state. Property owners who fail to salt, plow, or otherwise address icy surfaces may face liability, particularly for invitees.

Retail and Grocery Store Hazards

Spilled liquids, fallen merchandise, uneven flooring, and inadequate signage in stores lead to frequent premises liability claims. Notice becomes a central issue in these cases, because the critical question is often how long the hazard was present before the injury occurred.

Apartment Complex and Rental Property Injuries

Landlords owe a duty of care to tenants, particularly in common areas like stairways, hallways, parking lots, and shared outdoor spaces. Under MCL 554.139, Michigan law requires residential landlords to keep premises fit for their intended use and in reasonable repair.

Negligent Security Claims

When an assault or criminal act occurs on a property due to inadequate lighting, broken locks, or missing security measures, a negligent security claim may arise. Property owners in commercial and residential settings have a responsibility to address foreseeable security risks.

Parking Lot and Sidewalk Conditions

Potholes, cracked pavement, poor lighting, and unmarked elevation changes in parking lots and walkways lead to a significant number of premises liability claims across Southfield, Grand Rapids, and communities throughout Michigan.

How Long Do You Have to File a Premises Liability Claim in Michigan?

The statute of limitations acts as a legal deadline for filing a lawsuit. Under MCL 600.5805, the general deadline for personal injury claims in Michigan is three years from the date of injury.

This three-year window applies to most premises liability claims involving private property. However, certain situations involve shorter or additional deadlines:

• Claims against a Michigan government entity may require a notice of intent to be filed within 120 days of the incident, and claims against the State of Michigan may require notice within six months.


• The clock typically begins on the date of the injury, not the date a person first connects the injury to the property condition.


• Once the deadline passes, courts almost always dismiss the claim regardless of how strong the evidence may be.

Preserving evidence is especially time-sensitive in premises liability cases. Hazardous conditions are often repaired or altered shortly after an incident, and surveillance footage may be deleted on a rotating schedule. Acting quickly helps protect the physical and documentary evidence that a claim depends on.

What Evidence Helps Strengthen a Premises Liability Claim?

Building a strong premises liability claim depends heavily on documentation. The more detailed and timely the evidence, the more effectively it may demonstrate what happened and who bears responsibility.

Helpful forms of evidence include:

• Photographs or video of the hazardous condition taken as soon as possible after the incident


• Incident reports filed with the property owner, store manager, or landlord


• Medical records that link injuries to the specific event and location


• Names and contact information of witnesses who observed the condition or the incident


• Maintenance records, inspection logs, or repair histories for the property


• Weather reports for the date of the incident, particularly in winter slip and fall cases

Documenting everything promptly matters. Conditions change quickly, memories fade, and records may be destroyed or overwritten. Bringing all available documentation to an attorney helps establish a clear timeline of events.

FAQs for Premises Liability Claims

Is a property owner always responsible for a slip and fall in Michigan?

A property owner is not an insurer of every person who enters the property. Liability depends on the owner's duty of care, whether notice of the hazard existed, and whether the owner took reasonable steps to address the condition. Comparative fault also plays a role in determining recovery.

What is the difference between premises liability and general negligence?

Premises liability is a specific type of negligence claim tied to dangerous conditions on property. While both require proof of duty, breach, causation, and damages, premises liability also involves the visitor classification system (invitee, licensee, trespasser) and the notice requirement.

Does Michigan premises liability law apply to injuries on government property?

It may, but claims against government entities involve additional rules. The Michigan Governmental Tort Liability Act provides limited exceptions under which the government may be held liable, including for dangerous conditions in public buildings. Strict notice requirements and shorter filing timelines often apply.

Who bears responsibility for an injury on rented property in Michigan?

Responsibility depends on who controlled the area where the injury occurred. Landlords typically maintain control over common areas like hallways, stairways, and parking lots. Under MCL 554.139, residential landlords have a statutory duty to keep leased premises fit for their intended use and in reasonable repair.

Does a signed waiver prevent a premises liability claim?

A signed waiver or liability release may limit a property owner's exposure, but it does not necessarily eliminate all legal claims. Michigan courts evaluate waivers based on their clarity, scope, and whether they were signed voluntarily. Waivers that attempt to release a party from liability for gross negligence or intentional misconduct are generally not enforceable.

When the Ground Shifts Under You, a Steady Hand Matters

An injury on someone else's property raises questions that go far beyond the physical pain. It raises questions about fairness, accountability, and what comes next. 

Michigan premises liability law is detailed and evolving, especially in the wake of the Kandil-Elsayed decision. Every case depends on its own facts, from the type of property to the nature of the hazard to the evidence available.

At Goodman Acker, P.C., our attorneys have spent decades helping injured people across the Tri-County area and throughout Michigan pursue compensation for harm caused by dangerous property conditions. 

We offer a free consultation with no upfront cost, and our team works on a contingency fee basis, meaning we are only paid if your case results in a recovery. Reach out through our contact page or call 1-800-TRUSTED to talk through your situation with a premises liability lawyer who is ready to listen.