A fall on someone else’s property is not automatically that owner’s fault, and it is not automatically your own. Michigan premises liability law asks whether the property owner used reasonable care to keep the property safe, what your reason for being there was, and how much each side contributed to what happened. A 2023 Michigan Supreme Court decision changed an important piece of that analysis, and it changed it in favor of injured people.

Here is how the law works now.

Your reason for being there sets the owner’s duty

Michigan sorts visitors into categories, and the category controls how much the owner owed you.

  • Invitees are people on the property for the owner’s business purpose, like a customer in a store or a tenant’s guest in a leased building. They are owed the most: a duty of reasonable care to inspect the property and address hazards.
  • Licensees are social guests. The owner owes a duty to warn of known dangers but does not have the same obligation to inspect.
  • Trespassers are owed very little, with narrow exceptions, including special rules when children are involved.

Most serious premises cases involve invitees, because businesses open their doors to the public and take on the higher duty that comes with it.

The 2023 change to the open and obvious rule

For years, Michigan property owners had a powerful defense. If a hazard was open and obvious, meaning an average person would have noticed it on casual inspection, the owner generally owed no duty at all. That single doctrine ended a large number of slip and fall claims before they reached a jury.

That changed in 2023. In Kandil-Elsayed v F & E Oil, the Michigan Supreme Court overruled the old framework. An open and obvious condition is no longer an automatic bar to the owner’s duty. Instead, whether a hazard was open and obvious is now weighed as part of breach and comparative fault. In plain terms, the fact that you could have seen the danger does not end your case. It becomes one factor a jury considers when deciding how to divide responsibility.

This is one of the more significant shifts in Michigan injury law in years, and a lot of older guidance online still describes the rule the way it worked before. If you were told years ago that an obvious hazard meant no case, that advice is now out of date.

Comparative fault still matters

The change does not mean every fall is a winning case. Michigan uses comparative fault, so your own share of responsibility reduces what you recover. Under MCL 600.2959, if you are found more than 50 percent at fault, you cannot recover noneconomic damages such as pain and suffering at all.

That is why these cases turn on the specifics. Was the spill there long enough that the store should have cleaned it up? Was the lighting adequate? Were you doing something that contributed to the fall? The answers move the percentages, and the percentages move the outcome.

Negligent security is a related but narrower claim. When someone is hurt by a third party’s crime on a business’s property, Michigan allows a claim in limited circumstances tied to whether the harm was foreseeable and what the business reasonably could have done. These cases are harder than ordinary slip and falls, and they need early investigation.

Evidence disappears fast

Premises cases are won and lost on proof of the hazard and how long it was there. That evidence is fragile. Spills get mopped, broken handrails get fixed, and surveillance video is often overwritten within days or weeks.

If you are hurt on someone else’s property, the early steps matter: report the incident to the owner or manager and ask that a report be made, photograph the hazard before it is cleaned up, get the names of any witnesses, and keep the shoes and clothing you were wearing. Then get medical care and keep the records. The case is built from those details.

The deadline is firm

Under MCL 600.5805, you generally have three years from the date of the injury to file a premises liability lawsuit in Michigan. It sounds like a long time, but evidence fades long before the deadline, and insurers count on people waiting.

Get an honest read before you settle

A property owner’s insurer may offer a quick payment that looks reasonable until you add up future treatment. Before you accept anything, talk with a Dearborn personal injury attorney who can tell you what the claim is worth and how the comparative fault analysis is likely to play out.

LegalSolv handles slip and fall and premises liability claims across Wayne County and Metro Detroit, including Detroit, Livonia, and Taylor, on contingency, so there is no fee unless the case recovers. Call (313) 425-5555 or reach out through our contact page and we will give you a straight answer about whether the claim is worth pursuing.

Premises liability outcomes depend on the specific facts and on where you stood as a visitor. This article is general information, not legal advice. Speak with an attorney about your situation before relying on any of it.

FAQ

Can I sue for a slip and fall in Michigan?

Yes, if a property owner failed to use reasonable care to keep the property safe and that failure caused your injury. The owner’s duty depends on why you were on the property, and your own share of fault can reduce or bar recovery.

Does the open and obvious rule still bar slip and fall claims in Michigan?

Not the way it used to. In 2023, the Michigan Supreme Court in Kandil-Elsayed v F & E Oil ended the rule that an open and obvious hazard automatically eliminated the owner’s duty. Whether a hazard was open and obvious is now part of comparative fault, not an automatic loss.

What is the deadline to file a premises liability claim in Michigan?

Generally three years from the date of the injury under MCL 600.5805. Missing the deadline usually ends the claim regardless of how strong it is, so do not wait to get advice.

What if I was partly at fault for the fall?

Michigan uses comparative fault. Your recovery is reduced by your percentage of fault, and under MCL 600.2959, if you are more than 50 percent at fault you cannot recover noneconomic damages such as pain and suffering.

Do I have a case if I fell in a store?

Possibly. Customers are invitees, the category owed the highest duty of care. A store can be liable if it created a hazard or knew or should have known about it and failed to address it. The facts and the documentation decide it.