Most city sidewalks are safe for pedestrians and everyday traffic. However, when a city fails to maintain a sidewalk, and a person is injured after a trip and falls due to a defective sidewalk or trip hazard, the city may be held responsible for personal injuries. City sidewalk cases in Michigan are not easy. Government municipalities are entitled to governmental immunity, with a few exceptions. The Michigan sidewalk accident lawyers at the Lee Steinberg Law Firm can discuss your situation and see if you have a viable case.
What is the City Sidewalk Law in Michigan?
Under the Governmental Tort Liability Act (GTLA), governments and cities are provided broad immunity for personal injury actions. There are a few narrow exceptions. One of those exceptions is the sidewalk exception under MCL 691.1402a.
Under this exception, a city must maintain public sidewalks in reasonable repair. Cities and municipalities are presumed to have met this duty. The presumption can only be rebutted by proof the injury was caused by:
(a) A vertical discontinuity of 2 inches or more, or
(b) A dangerous condition in the sidewalk itself of a particular character other than just a vertical discontinuity.
Under MCL 691.1401(f), the term “sidewalk” refers to paved public sidewalks intended for pedestrian use.
What Are the Exceptions to the Sidewalk Liability Rule?
The first rebuttal is known as the “2-inch rule.” Basically, it means the height differential between two sidewalk slabs must be at least 2 inches or more to prove the area is not in reasonable repair. A height differential less than that presumes the sidewalk area is in reasonable repair and there is no liability.
The second rebuttal is less common but refers to other potential dangers on the sidewalk that can exist. For example, if their sidewalk is in total disrepair and the cement is crumbling away, then this exception is what you would use to prove city liability.
Mann v. City of Detroit – New Detroit Sidewalk Case
This second exception was recently analyzed by the Michigan Supreme Court. In Mann v. City of Detroit, the Supreme Court reversed a Court of Appeals decision that dismissed a trip and fall case against the city of Detroit. This decision is important because it helps.
In Mann, the plaintiff tripped over a 5-inch tall, 4-inch wide metal stub protruding from the sidewalk on Greenfield Road in Detroit. The stub, a remnant of a removed street sign, had been paved into the sidewalk. Mr. Mann fell backward and suffered serious injuries. He sued the City of Detroit, alleging a violation of the duty to maintain sidewalks in reasonable repair under MCL 691.1402a.
The Supreme Court held the broken stub qualified both as a vertical discontinuity of 2 inches or more [MCL 691.1402a(3)(a)] and as a dangerous condition in the sidewalk itself [MCL 691.1402a(3)(b)]. The Court reasoned the stub was physically embedded in the middle of the sidewalk, directly in the path of pedestrians. Most importantly, the sub was in a dangerous condition within the sidewalk structure.
The Supreme Court went on to hold that the law does not limit defects only to irregularities in pavement. The term “in the sidewalk itself” encompasses dangers like the embedded stub. The Court of Appeals erred by applying case law involving external fixtures (e.g., guy wires and light poles) instead of analyzing the unique nature of the stub in this case.
The Flawed Dissent in Mann v. City of Detroit
One justice did dissent from the majority’s holding. Justice Brian Zahra, a judge who rarely sides with plaintiffs in personal injury cases, would have upheld the Court of Appeal’s decision to dismiss the case. Justice Zahra wrote that he thought the metal stub was not part of the sidewalk, just a remnant of an old signpost, and therefore outside the sidewalk exception. He also felt that because the stub was a fixture on top of, not part of, the sidewalk, the exception did not apply.
However, this dissent misreads the text and purpose of MCL 691.1402a. First, the stub was not merely “on top of” the sidewalk. It was encased into the concrete, making it part of the sidewalk.
Second, the legislative intent of the sidewalk exception to governmental immunity is to promote sidewalk safety. Allowing a large protrusion embedded in a pedestrian path undermines this goal.
Last, the dissent’s reasoning is that municipalities should be given a “get out of jail free” card, even where clearly embedded tripping hazards exist.
How Much Time Do I Have to File a Lawsuit Against the City for a Sidewalk Defect?
The statute of limitations for a city sidewalk lawsuit is 2 years from the date of the injury.
But remember, you must file the proper notice to the city or municipality response for the sidewalk within 120 days of the fall. MCL 691.1404. This notice has special rules and is strictly enforced. For example, the exact nature and location of the defect must be provided, as well as the injury sustained and names of witnesses known at the time. As a result, it is important to contact a Michigan sidewalk fall injury lawyer as soon as possible.
What are Common Injuries from a Sidewalk Trip-and-Fall
There are a lot of different injuries that can arise from a trip-and-fall due to a defective sidewalk. However, some of the typical injuries include:
- A broken hip or a broken wrist
- Broken leg
- Low back injury and pain
- Facial injuries
- Torn ligaments
- Neck pain and headaches
- Concussion
- Scrapes, scarring and bruising
Michigan City Sidewalk Injury Lawyers That Fight for You
Contact our offices immediately if you or someone you know has tripped over a sidewalk and sustained a bad injury. The attorneys and legal professionals at the Lee Steinberg Law Firm have been helping injured pedestrians for almost 50 years. We do it by meeting with witnesses, recovering video, taking photos, and hiring experts to explain how the city broke the safety rules.
We also do it by meeting and communicating with our clients. Call our office anytime at 1-800-LEE-FREE (1-866-761-9142). The consultation is free, and we will never charge anything until we win your case.