Michigan Supreme Court Protects Condo Owners’ Rights: Condo Associations Now Accountable for Injuries on Common Property

Historic Change in Michigan Law: Condo Owners Can Finally Sue for Negligent Maintenance of Common Areas

Until very recently, condo owners could not sue their condominium association for injuries arising out of the association’s failure to properly maintain the premises.  Michigan’s law said that if you owned a condominium, then you were a co-owner of the “common areas” like sidewalks, parking lots, and entry ways.  Because you were a co-owner of those common areas, you couldn’t sue yourself for failing to properly maintain the premises.  As a result, many people injured as a result of the condominium associations’ neglect and improper maintenance were left without a remedy by this quirk of Michigan law. 

The Janini Case: How a Slip on Icy Sidewalks Led to a Landmark Legal Victory in Michigan for Condo Owners

Finally, on July 11, 2024, the Michigan Supreme Court issued its opinion in Janini v London Townhouses Condominium Association, holding that condominium associations could be responsible for maintaining the common areas of the complex.  In that case, Mr. Janini a condo owner, stepped out of his own condo into the complex’s common areas to throw some trash into a dumpster.  In order to get to the dumpster, Mr. Janini had to walk on the sidewalk, which was covered in snow and ice.  Unfortunately, Mr. Janini slipped and fell, and hit his head, causing a brain injury.

Mr. Janini sued his condominium association, alleging that the association breached its duty to maintain the sidewalks and to keep them free of snow and ice.  The condominium association’s bylaws expressly state that it is responsible for maintenance of the common areas of the complex, including the sidewalks.  In response to the lawsuit, the condominium association filed a motion to dismiss the case, arguing that Mr. Janini as a condo owner cannot sue himself.  The trial court denied the condo association’s motion, but the Court of Appeals reversed the trial court, finding that Michigan case law required that Mr. Janini’s case be dismissed.  According to the Court of Appeals, Mr. Janini did not enter onto the “land of another” when he fell on the sidewalk, and so he could not meet the requirements to sue for injury based upon premises liability.

Legal Arguments and Court Rulings: Understanding the Michigan Supreme Court’s Game-Changing Decision For Condo Owners

The Michigan Supreme Court took up Mr. Janini’s case, and evaluated whether Mr. Janini could sue his own condo association.  The duty that a possessor of land owes to someone who comes on the possessor’s land depends on whether the person is an invitee, a licensee, or a trespasser. 

• A ‘trespasser’ is someone who comes onto the land of another without consent. 
• An ‘invitee’ is  someone who comes onto the land of another by invitation which carries a representation that reasonable care has been taken to prepare the land. 
• A ‘licensee’ is a person who is permitted to enter the land of another by virtue of the possessor’s consent. 

Are Common Areas of a Condo Complex “The land of another”?

Ultimately, the Supreme Court had to answer the question: are the “common areas” of a condominium complex “the land of another”?  The previous Michigan case law said that they were not the “land of another”, and so condo owners couldn’t sue.

The Michigan Supreme Court didn’t exactly answer that question.  Instead, the Court held that the correct question was “who has possession and control over the area?”  The Michigan Supreme Court held that because the condo owners give up a certain amount of possession and control over the parts of the condo complex that become the “common areas” to the condo association, the condo association had sufficient possession and control over the area where Mr. Janini fell and was injured to be a proper defendant in the litigation.

This decision is a significant victory for condo owners’ rights, ensuring that they have legal recourse when injured due to the negligence of their condominium association.

Giroux Pappas’ Involvement: Attorney Jason Blankenship’s Role in Securing This Important Legal Precedent

E. Jason Blankenship, of counsel to Giroux Pappas, was asked by the Michigan Association of Justice to write an amicus curiae brief to the Michigan Supreme Court on the questions presented in the Janini case. The Michigan Association of Justice is an organization of over 1500 Michigan lawyers engaged primarily in litigation and trial work.

As a result of Jason’s work, and the work of the attorneys for Mr. Janini, condo associations will now be responsible for injuries caused by the failure of those associations to meet their obligations to remove dangerous snow and ice from the common sidewalks and walkways.

This ruling is a significant advancement for in Michigan, offering them greater condo owners’ rights protection and ensuring their safety in common areas.

Giroux Pappas: Michigan Condo Owners Personal Injury Attorneys

Giroux Pappas Trial Attorneys has extensive slip and fall and premises liability experience. We are pleased with the ruling which clarifies the Condo Associations obligations and can help advise those injured in these situations.

If you are a condo owner and have been injured on your grounds managed by your HOA you now have the right to sue. Contact us for free case evaluation. 248.531.8665