On June 11, 2025, the Michigan Supreme Court issued an important decision in Mann v. City of Detroit, reinforcing the duty of municipalities to maintain public sidewalks in reasonable repair and holding the City of Detroit accountable for a dangerous sidewalk condition that caused serious injury to a pedestrian.
The case involved a Detroit man who tripped over a circular metal stub protruding five inches from the middle of a public sidewalk—a clear hazard that was paved into the concrete and stood four inches wide. The plaintiff suffered significant injuries after falling backward and striking his head and back on the pavement.
The City of Detroit sought dismissal of the lawsuit by arguing that the metal stub was not a legally actionable sidewalk defect under Michigan’s Governmental Tort Liability Act (GTLA), specifically MCL 691.1402a, which governs municipal liability for sidewalk defects. But the Michigan Supreme Court rejected that argument, concluding that the metal stub did in fact fall within the statute’s definition of a defect.
The Court held that because the stub created a “vertical discontinuity defect of 2 inches or more” and was “embedded in the sidewalk itself”, it met both standards under the statute—MCL 691.1402a(3)(a) and (b)—for rebutting the presumption that the sidewalk was in reasonable repair. The Court emphasized that the Legislature’s use of the phrase “in the sidewalk itself” was broad enough to encompass more than just flaws in the pavement and did not exempt protruding hazards that are part of the sidewalk structure.
Under MCL 691.1402a(1), municipalities have an affirmative duty to maintain public sidewalks in reasonable repair. In a civil lawsuit, cities are presumed to have met this duty unless the injured party can prove one of two things:
- That the injury was caused by a vertical discontinuity in the sidewalk of 2 inches or more, or
- That there was a dangerous condition in the sidewalk itself, even if it is not solely based on a height difference.
Municipalities may still assert common law defenses—such as arguing that the condition was open and obvious—but that does not automatically shield them from liability when a hazard meets the statutory criteria.
Importantly, the Court criticized the Court of Appeals for relying on factually distinguishable cases and reminded lower courts to focus on the plain language of the statute to give effect to the Legislature’s intent. In reversing the appellate ruling and reinstating the trial court’s denial of summary disposition, the Supreme Court made clear that municipalities can be held liable when they fail to address embedded hazards that pose real risks to pedestrians.
As Jules Olsman, partner at Olsman MacKenzie Peacock and a leading advocate for injury victims, explained: “This decision sends a strong message that cities cannot ignore dangerous sidewalk conditions – especially ones they’ve built into the pavement. It’s a win for pedestrian safety and common sense.”
The case now returns to the Wayne County Circuit Court for further proceedings.
At Olsman MacKenzie Peacock, we represent individuals seriously injured due to unsafe conditions on public or private property. If you or a loved one has been injured due to a dangerous sidewalk or other preventable hazard, our experienced personal injury attorneys are here to help you pursue justice.