Michigan Court of Appeals Holds Property Owner May Be Liable for Injuries Caused by Wild Animals

In Leiendecker v. Ascension Genesys Hospital, the Michigan Court of Appeals established a doctrine for when property owners can be held liable for injuries caused by wild animals on their premises. The plaintiff, a contractor working at an Ascension facility, was attacked by a goose that had been living on the hospital grounds for several days. He suffered a fractured hip requiring total hip replacement and sued both the hospital and its security vendor.

The Court affirmed that the common-law doctrine of ferae naturae bars negligence claims involving wild animals unless the defendant exercised dominion, control, or possession over the animal. Because neither Ascension nor its security vendor controlled the goose, both defendants were entitled to summary disposition on the negligence claims. The Court also dismissed all claims against the security vendor, noting that contractors without possession and control over the premises cannot face premises liability.

However, the Court reversed dismissal of the premises liability claim against Ascension. Following its recent decision in Tripp v. Baker, the Court held that a wild animal can constitute a “dangerous condition on the land” if it poses an artificial risk to visitors. The key factors are whether the property owner knew or should have known about the animal’s dangerous tendencies and failed to warn invitees or take remedial action. Here, plaintiff’s allegations that the goose had attacked multiple people over several days, that Ascension employees knew of these prior attacks, and that Ascension failed to warn or remove the goose were sufficient to survive summary disposition.

The Leiendecker decision continues the trend in Michigan to expand liability in premises liability cases since the Michigan Supreme Court abolished the open and obvious defense in the 2023 case of Kandil-Elsayed v. F & E Oil, Inc. Since the Kandil-Elsayed decision, premises liability litigation in Michigan has significantly increased, and we anticipate that the Leiendecker decision will result in more premises liability cases in Michigan.