From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Mullen v. Zerfas

Supreme Court of Michigan
Dec 20, 2007
480 Mich. 989 (Mich. 2007)

Summary

In Mullen v Zerfas, 480 Mich 989 (2007), the Supreme Court held that this Court erred by indicating in a different case that "MCL 554.139(1) establishes a duty on the part of owners of leased residential property to invitees or licensees generally."

Summary of this case from Walker v. Hela Mgmt.

Opinion

No. 134418.

December 20, 2007.

Court of Appeals No. 275262.


Summary Dispositions December 20, 2007:

Pursuant to MCR 7.302(G)(1), in lieu of granting leave to appeal, we remand this case to the Eaton Circuit Court for reconsideration of the defendant's motion for summary disposition. The Court of Appeals in O'Donnell v Garasic, 259 Mich App 569 (2003), erred by indicating that MCL 554.139(1) establishes a duty on the part of owners of leased residential property to invitees or licensees generally. The covenants created by the statute establish duties of a lessor or licensor of residential property to the lessee or licensee of the residential property, most typically of a landlord to a tenant. By the terms of the statute, the duties exist between the contracting parties. The defendant landlord did not have a duty under MCL 554.139(1) to the plaintiff, a social guest of the tenant. On remand, the circuit court must decide the defendant's motion for summary disposition under common-law premises liability principles.


Summaries of

Mullen v. Zerfas

Supreme Court of Michigan
Dec 20, 2007
480 Mich. 989 (Mich. 2007)

In Mullen v Zerfas, 480 Mich 989 (2007), the Supreme Court held that this Court erred by indicating in a different case that "MCL 554.139(1) establishes a duty on the part of owners of leased residential property to invitees or licensees generally."

Summary of this case from Walker v. Hela Mgmt.

In Mullen v Zerfas, 480 Mich 989-990; 742 NW2d 114 (2007), our Supreme Court explained that the terms of the statute indicate that the duties prescribed by MCL 554.139(1) exist between the contracting parties and that the defendant landlord did not have a duty under the statute to a social guest of the tenant.

Summary of this case from Ceaser v. Gouda
Case details for

Mullen v. Zerfas

Case Details

Full title:SHARON MULLEN, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. OPAL ZERFAS, Defendant-Appellant

Court:Supreme Court of Michigan

Date published: Dec 20, 2007

Citations

480 Mich. 989 (Mich. 2007)

Citing Cases

Wenzel v. Tremonti

The duties set forth in Mich. Comp. Laws § 554.139 “exist between . . . contracting parties.” Mullen v.…

Walker v. Hela Mgmt., LLC

MCR 7.305(H)(1). The appellant shall file a supplemental brief addressing: (1) the definition of a licensee…