When someone is badly hurt or killed in an escalator accident, a fall, or another injury on property they don’t own, families often assume only the property owner can be held responsible. Michigan law is more complicated than that. The companies that design, inspect, maintain, or repair a property may share the blame, but for years those companies have argued they cannot be sued at all.
A September 2026 order from the Michigan Supreme Court in a wrongful death case arising from a fatal escalator fall at Detroit Metro Airport shows that argument is losing ground.
What happened on the escalator at Detroit Metro Airport?
On September 4, 2018, Thomas Quigley stepped onto an up escalator in the North Terminal of Detroit Metropolitan Wayne County Airport. He was carrying luggage. When the luggage shifted, he lost his footing and fell, breaking his neck. He died the next day.
His family brought a wrongful death lawsuit against three companies:
- DANTeC, the airline group that runs and maintains the North Terminal under a contract with the Wayne County Airport Authority;
- AvAirPros Services, which supplied staff and services to help DANTeC run the terminal; and
- Schindler Elevator Corporation, which provided safety inspections and advice on the terminal’s escalators.
The family claimed the escalator was unsafe for a busy airport baggage area. According to the lawsuit, the steps were too narrow, there were too few flat steps before the incline began, the escalator moved too fast for the many older travelers and children who used it, and there were no clear warnings telling passengers with luggage to take the elevator instead.
Why did a lower court dismiss claims against the escalator companies?
Michigan law recognizes two different kinds of injury claims that often overlap:
- Property-condition claims (called premises liability) are about a dangerous condition on the property itself. These claims can usually be brought only against whoever runs or controls the property.
- General negligence claims are about careless conduct. These claims can be brought against anyone whose failure to act reasonably caused the harm.
The trial court allowed the Quigley family’s case to move forward. But in October 2025, the Michigan Court of Appeals threw out most of it. The Court of Appeals reasoned that because Mr. Quigley was hurt by something on the property, the escalator, every claim in the case had to be treated as a property-condition claim. Since the family did not claim that AvAirPros or Schindler ran or controlled the terminal, the court said those two companies could not be held responsible at all, even if they were careless in the work they were hired to do.
The Court of Appeals let the property-condition claim against DANTeC, the terminal operator, continue. It ordered dismissal of the general negligence claims against all three companies.
How a Michigan Supreme Court decision about an apartment trench changed the rules
In July 2026, the Michigan Supreme Court decided Bowerman v. Red Oak Management. In that case, a 75-year-old woman living in an apartment building for elderly and disabled tenants broke her ankle when she stepped into a trench near the building’s dumpster before sunrise. A concrete contractor had dug the trench, finished its job, and left the trench uncovered and unmarked for weeks.
The contractor argued that the trench was a condition on the property, so the only possible claim was a property-condition claim. And because the contractor no longer controlled the property, it said it owed the injured woman nothing. The Supreme Court disagreed.
The Court held that the claim against the contractor was a general negligence claim. The injured woman did not simply say the contractor created a hazard. She said the contractor failed to act with reasonable care in how it did its work, including by leaving the trench unfilled, unmarked, and unguarded. Under Michigan law, anyone carrying out a job must take reasonable care not to put others in danger. That responsibility does not disappear just because the injury happened on land the contractor did not control.
The Court also made clear that an injured person’s knowledge of a hazard, or the path she chose to walk, does not automatically defeat her claim. Michigan lets a jury reduce damages if the injured person was partly at fault, but that does not end the case before trial.
What the Supreme Court’s order means for the airport case
The Court of Appeals decided the Quigley case before Bowerman, and it relied on the same reasoning the Supreme Court later found too narrow: that an injury involving something on the property can only be a property-condition claim.
On September 17, 2026, the Supreme Court issued an order throwing out the part of the Court of Appeals ruling that dismissed the family’s general negligence claims. It sent the case back to the Court of Appeals to take a fresh look at those claims in light of Bowerman. The Supreme Court declined to hear DANTeC’s separate appeal, so the property-condition claim against the terminal operator remains in the case.
The Supreme Court did not decide who will ultimately win. That question now goes back to the Court of Appeals. But the order sends a clear signal: companies whose own careless work helps create a dangerous situation cannot automatically avoid responsibility just because they did not own or run the property where someone was hurt.
Who can be held responsible for an escalator accident or fall in Michigan?
Many serious injuries happen in places run by one company but designed, inspected, cleaned, maintained, or repaired by others. Think of airports, stadiums, hospitals, nursing homes, apartment complexes, and shopping centers. Depending on the facts, the parties who may share responsibility for an escalator accident or fall include:
- the property owner;
- the company that operates or manages the building;
- the company that designed or manufactured the equipment;
- the companies hired to inspect, maintain, or repair it; and
- contractors who performed work that left a hazard behind.
Each company’s role matters. How a lawsuit describes that role can decide whether the case survives or is dismissed before any evidence is gathered. That is why it is important to identify every responsible party early and to bring the right kind of claim against each one.
Frequently asked questions
Can I sue a company that didn’t own the property where I was hurt?
Possibly. Under the Michigan Supreme Court’s 2026 decision in Bowerman v. Red Oak Management, a contractor or service company that fails to use reasonable care in its own work can be held responsible even if it did not own or control the property.
Who is responsible for an escalator accident in Michigan?
Depending on the facts, responsibility may fall on the property owner, the company that operates the building, the escalator manufacturer, or the companies hired to inspect and maintain the escalator. Each party’s role matters.
If I knew about the hazard, can I still bring a claim?
Often, yes. Michigan uses a comparative fault system. Your own knowledge or choices may reduce the amount you recover, but they do not automatically bar your claim.
How long do I have to file a wrongful death claim in Michigan?
Deadlines vary depending on the type of claim, and some claims have much shorter notice requirements. Talk to a lawyer as soon as possible to protect your family’s rights.
Talk to a Michigan wrongful death lawyer
If you or someone you love was seriously injured or killed in an escalator accident, a fall, or because of careless work on someone else’s property, the attorneys at Olsman MacKenzie Peacock can help you understand who may be responsible. Contact us today for a free consultation.