Property owners and possessors in Michigan are urged to take note of a recent framework from the Michigan Supreme Court that impacts how premises liability cases are handled in court. This new regulation stands to reshape traditional legal understandings of owner responsibilities in instances of on-site accidents, such as “slip-and-fall” cases, marking a pivot away from a longstanding principle.
For some time now, the judicial interpretation in Michigan, based on the case Lugo v Ameritech, 464 Mich 512 (2001), held that keepers of premises generally are not obligated to safeguard invitees from hazards that are “open and obvious”. This fundamental concept has been at the forefront of numerous subsequent legal discussions and rulings, forming a cornerstone of premises liability law within the state.
The Michigan Supreme Court’s newest judgment, however, brings significant change to this prevalent norm. It modifies the approach taken towards premises liability cases, marking noticeable deviation from earlier interpretations. This shift invites greater investigation into the intricacies of premises liability law and has implications for how lawsuits of this nature are contested in court.
This transformation urges all property owners and holders to familiarize themselves with the details of the new legal framework and actions they might need to take to appropriately account for this development. There may be essential revisions to be made to current safety protocols and procedures to align with the evolved definition of duties and obligations.
Detailed information about this legal modification is available on the original article, “Property Owners: Don’t Let Michigan’s New Slip-and-Fall Case Law Trip You Up” published by Miller Canfield.