Tellin v. Forsyth Township
291 Mich. App. 692
| Mich. Ct. App. | 2011Background
- Public library building (Learning Center) in Forsyth Township, Michigan, previously part of K. I. Sawyer AFB, deeded to Forsyth and leased to West Branch; I-beam configuration added to roof overhang in 2003-04 under staff, without formal approval or inspection; volunteer Erdmann warned staff the I-beam might be loose; incident on July 18, 2006 at night when a 24-hour book drop under the overhang remained open, injuring two youths; plaintiffs alleged failure to repair or maintain under the public-building exception to governmental immunity; trial court ruled the Townships failed to prove immunity under the public-building exception; on appeal, court affirmed immunity denial based on failure to repair/maintain, building open to public, and notice of defect.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the Learning Center was open to the public for the public-building exception | Tellin/Werfelman argue building open to public. | Townships contend closed after hours, not open for use. | Yes, open to the public. |
| Whether the I-beam defect was a design defect or a failure to repair/maintain | Plaintiffs argue failure to repair/maintain caused hazards. | Defect was a design issue, not maintenance. | Failure to repair/maintain; not a design defect. |
| Whether the Township had actual or constructive notice of the defect | Knowledge based on Erdmann’s warning suffices. | No timely notice; no inspection equates to no notice. | Townships had sufficient notice. |
| Whether the alleged defect falls within the public-building exception and immunity applies | Exception applies due to maintenance failure. | Immunity applies absent maintenance failure. | Public-building exception satisfied; immunity denied. |
Key Cases Cited
- Renny v Dep’t of Transp, 478 Mich 490 (2007) (distinguishes design defect vs. repair/maintain duty; nuances on open/building design vs. maintenance)
- Kerbersky v Northern Mich Univ, 458 Mich 525 (1998) (building open to public despite partial access limits; broader open-use test)
- Maskery v Univ of Mich Bd of Regents, 468 Mich 609 (2003) (limits of public access affect open status under public-building exception)
- Pierce v Lansing, 265 Mich App 174 (2005) (discusses governmental immunity and statutory context)
- Grimes v Dep’t of Transp, 475 Mich 72 (2006) (relevant to governmental immunity and statutory interpretation)
- Fane v Detroit Library Comm, 465 Mich 68 (2001) (public-building exception and open-for-use concept)