Curb Appeal | A Case Study
Curb Appeal
Discover how the Court of Appeals ruled in Douglas Williams v. City of Detroit, redefining curb liability and municipal responsibilities. Explore what this case means for cities, attorneys, and injury victims.
The Scenario
Imagine you’ve just parked your car and are about to cross the street, when the curb crumbles beneath you and injures your foot. Badly. This is exactly what happened in the case of Douglas Williams v. City of Detroit. Williams, rightfully, hired an attorney and sued the City of Detroit for failing to maintain the curb in a reasonably safe condition. The City, under the Governmental Tort Liability Act (GTLA), argued that the curb was part of the highway, which is under the county jurisdiction, not the City’s.
The Blame Game
Initially, the trial court granted favor to the City, citing Sharp v. City of Benton Harbor, which classified curbs as part of the highway.
The Court of Appeals, however, disagreed, stating the curb in question was part of the sidewalk, not the highway. This decision was based on the curb’s characteristics and its use by pedestrians. The characteristics the Court of Appeals relied upon were:
Raised Concrete Blocks: the curb was described as a series of concrete blocks.
Level of the Sidewalk: These blocks were approximately at the same level as the remainder of the sidewalk.
90-Degree Angle: The curb was at a 90-degree angle to the street itself
Width: The concrete blocks appeared to be about two feet wide or more.
Pedestrian Use: The court noted that there was little reason why a pedestrian could not or would not use the curb for walking in the same manner as the sidewalk.
Continuous with the Sidewalk: The curb was described as “contiguous with the sidewalk,” meaning it flowed seamlessly with the rest of the sidewalk.
Based on this, the Court of Appeals decided the City of Detroit could be liable for the sidewalk’s condition, as the curb was deemed part of the sidewalk, and under the GTLA, municipalities are generally immune from tort liability but must maintain highways and sidewalks in reasonable repair.
While The City argued that it did not have notice of the defect 30 days before the incident and that the defect did not meet statutory guidelines for disrepair, the Court of Appeals did not rule on these arguments and remanded the case to the trial court for further proceedings on these issues.
What This Means
For cities and municipalities, clearly defining the responsibilities for maintaining different parts of public infrastructure is important, and a consistent assessment of maintenance and inspection protocols for sidewalks and curbs can help avoid liability.
For attorneys, the decision clarifies the classification of curbs as part of sidewalks rather than highways, and it underscores the need for courts to consider the specific characteristics and uses of infrastructure components when determining liability.
For anyone who has been injured, remember:
Provide evidence. Take photos of everything after the incident and injury.
Chronicle all medical visits and bills.
Hire an attorney! They can guide you and find information about whether municipalities had notice of defects and whether the defects meet the standards for disrepair.