Michigan Trampoline Accident Lawyer

Michigan's Legal Framework for Trampoline Injuries

Michigan law governs a trampoline injury claim when the injury happened in Michigan. The site's national pages cover how these claims work in general; this page covers the Michigan rules that shape them.

Three legal theories usually come up, and more than one can apply to the same fall. Premises liability is the responsibility a property owner or operator may have for the condition of a place and how it is run. Product liability is the responsibility a maker or seller may have when a product is defective and the defect causes harm. Negligent supervision is a claim that someone who had a duty to watch over jumpers, such as park staff, failed to do it with reasonable care.

The setting matters early. An injury at a commercial trampoline park often raises questions about the operator's rules, staffing and court layout, and about any form signed at the door. An injury on a backyard trampoline raises questions about the homeowner, the equipment and who was watching. If a frame, spring, net or mat failed, product liability may enter the picture alongside either setting.

For someone who was hurt, the theory matters because it decides which Michigan statutes apply and who may be answerable. The first questions worth sorting out are where it happened, who controlled that place, and whether the equipment itself is in question.

Filing Deadlines Under Michigan Law

A statute of limitations is the period the law allows to start a lawsuit; a claim filed after it runs is generally barred. Michigan's main rule sits in section 600.5805 of the Michigan Compiled Laws, which provides: "Except as otherwise provided in this section, the period of limitations is 3 years after the time of the death or injury for all actions to recover damages for the death of a person or for injury to a person or property."

That same section sets a separate rule for product claims: "The period of limitations is 3 years for a products liability action." It adds that for a product that has been in use for not less than 10 years, the plaintiff must prove a prima facie case without the benefit of any presumption. Whether any period of repose or other provision outside that section affects a product claim depends on Michigan's current law.

For children, section 600.5851 of the Michigan Compiled Laws provides that, except as its subsections (7) and (8) provide, a person who is under 18 or insane when the claim accrues has one year after the disability is removed, through death or otherwise, to bring the action, even though the period of limitations has run. For a parent of an injured child, that rule can change the timing picture significantly.

One narrow rule deserves mention. Section 691.1404 of the Michigan Compiled Laws applies only to injuries from a defective highway and requires notice to the governmental agency within 120 days of the injury, giving the exact location and nature of the defect, the injury and the known witnesses. For an injured person under 18, the notice must be served within 180 days of the injury; for a person physically or mentally unable to give notice, within 180 days after the disability ends. That rule rarely fits a trampoline injury, but it shows how one Michigan deadline can differ from the next.

In plain terms, the date of the injury or death, the injured person's age at that time, and the age of any equipment involved are the facts that shape timing. Those dates are among the first things a conversation with an attorney can pin down.

Accident and Injury Scenarios This Page Covers

Trampoline injuries in Michigan tend to fall into a few broad patterns, and each points toward different questions.

At a commercial trampoline park, people describe falls onto padding or frames, collisions when several jumpers share a court, landings in foam pit injuries cases, and situations where staff were not watching a crowded area. Those facts raise premises liability and negligent supervision questions about how the park was laid out, staffed and run.

On a backyard trampoline, the questions shift to the homeowner, who was invited, how many people were jumping and whether an adult was nearby. Fractures, spinal injuries and trampoline head injuries can come from either setting.

Equipment failures form a third pattern: a torn mat, a broken spring, a collapsing frame or a net that gave way. A failure like that does not by itself prove a defect, and an injury does not prove anyone's fault. Those are questions the facts answer.

What is at stake for an injured person is that the pattern decides which theory, and which party, the facts point toward. If you were hurt, the records that usually matter include medical records and bills, photos and video of the scene and the equipment, the trampoline or the failed part itself, any incident report a park prepared, the purchase record for backyard equipment, and the names of people who saw it happen. Families often find these pieces scattered, and gathering them is part of understanding what happened.

Who May Be Responsible Under Michigan Law

The answer depends on the theory that fits the facts, and the parties differ for each.

Under premises liability, the potential defendants are the people or businesses that owned or controlled the property: a trampoline park operator, a landlord of the building, or a homeowner. A negligence claim asks four things: whether the defendant owed the injured person a duty of care, whether it breached that duty, whether the breach caused the injury, and what damages resulted. Negligent supervision follows the same elements, focused on the person or business responsible for watching jumpers.

If the equipment failed, the companies that made or sold the trampoline or a component may be answerable under product liability. For the injured person, the question becomes whether the product was defective and whether that defect, rather than the fall alone, caused the injury. An accident alone does not show a defect, and the age of the product can matter; as noted above, Michigan treats proof differently for a product in use for 10 years or more.

When more than one person contributed, Michigan spreads the fault among all of them. Under section 600.6304 of the Michigan Compiled Laws, the jury, or the court without a jury, finds each plaintiff's total damages and a percentage of fault for every person who contributed to the injury, including nonparties and people released from liability, whether or not they were or could have been named. The trier of fact weighs both the nature of each person's conduct and how closely it caused the harm. For someone hurt at a park, that means the operator, a manufacturer and others can each carry a share, and the injured person's own share is counted too.

The practical questions to weigh are who owned or ran the place, who made or sold the equipment, and who was supervising. An attorney can help sort out which of those parties the facts actually reach.

How Michigan's Comparative Fault Rules Affect a Claim

Comparative fault means a court reduces damages by the share of blame assigned to the injured person. Michigan's rule appears in section 600.2959 of the Michigan Compiled Laws. It provides that in a tort action for personal injury, property damage or wrongful death, "the court shall reduce the damages by the percentage of comparative fault of the person upon whose injury or death the damages are based." If that person's fault is greater than the combined fault of everyone else, whether or not they are parties, the court reduces economic damages by that percentage, "and noneconomic damages shall not be awarded." The statute's compiler's note says the current version applies to causes of action arising on or after its 2013 effective date.

This matters to anyone who worries they did something wrong, such as attempting a flip or ignoring a posted rule. Being partly at fault does not end a claim under this section, but a greater share changes which damages remain.

Michigan liability is also several only, not joint. Section 600.6304 says a person generally does not pay more than his or her percentage of fault, except as its subsection (6) provides, and the rule does not apply to a defendant jointly and severally liable under section 6312.

A waiver or release is a document in which a person agrees to give up certain claims in advance. Its effect under Michigan law depends on the facts, the wording, who signed it and the Michigan authority that applies. The site's page on trampoline park waivers explains what such documents contain.

If you are weighing how your own conduct may be viewed, the posted rules, any signed form, and accounts from witnesses are the pieces that usually bear on fault. Keeping a copy of any signed document allows an attorney to review its wording.

Damages Michigan Law May Allow — and What They Depend On

Michigan sorts an injured person's losses into two groups. Economic damages are the losses with a number attached, such as medical expenses and lost wages. Noneconomic damages are the losses without a receipt, such as pain and suffering. Because section 600.2959's fault bar falls on noneconomic damages, which group a loss belongs to can change what remains available.

A separate limit applies only in a product liability action. Section 600.2946a of the Michigan Compiled Laws sets base limits on noneconomic loss of $280,000, or $500,000 when the defect caused death or permanent loss of a vital bodily function. The state treasurer adjusts those figures each year to match the limits in section 1483, so the current amounts differ from the base figures. The higher limit does not apply to a defendant if the trier of fact finds by a preponderance of the evidence that the death or loss resulted from that defendant's gross negligence, or if the court finds the matters in section 2949a true. The jury is not told about the limits; the court adjusts the award afterward.

Which categories apply depends on the injury, its treatment, its effect on work and daily life, the theory of the claim and the fault findings. If you are trying to understand which of these categories fits your situation, a case evaluation is a conversation with our attorney about the injuries, the treatment and the losses involved.

Wrongful Death Claims After a Fatal Trampoline Accident in Michigan

Wrongful death is a claim the law allows when a person dies because of another's wrongful act, neglect or fault. Under section 600.2922 of the Michigan Compiled Laws, the defendant is liable for damages if the conduct would have entitled the injured person to sue had death not followed.

The action differs from a personal injury claim in who brings it. Section 600.2922 says every action "shall be brought by, and in the name of, the personal representative of the estate of the deceased." Within 30 days after the action begins, the personal representative must serve the complaint and notice on those who may be entitled to damages. Subject to sections 700.2802 to 700.2805 of the estates and protected individuals code, those people include survivors who suffer damages among the deceased's spouse, children, descendants, parents, grandparents, brothers and sisters, and the children of the deceased's spouse. If none of the listed relatives survive, the people who would inherit under intestate succession may qualify.

For a grieving family, this means a relative does not bring the claim in his or her own name; it runs through the estate, and the period from section 600.5805 is three years after the time of death, except as that section otherwise provides. The early questions a family may weigh are who will serve as personal representative and which relatives the statute reaches, and an attorney can help sort out how the estate and the claim fit together.

What Michigan's Recreational-Use Statute Means for Your Claim

Michigan's recreational-use statute limits when a landowner can be sued by someone using the land for outdoor recreation. Section 324.73301 of the Michigan Compiled Laws provides that, except as the section otherwise provides, no cause of action arises for injuries to a person on another's land without paying the owner, tenant or lessee a valuable consideration. The section applies to the purpose of fishing, hunting, trapping, camping, hiking, sightseeing, motorcycling, snowmobiling, or any other outdoor recreational use or trail use, with or without permission. The exception is when the injuries were caused by the owner's, tenant's or lessee's gross negligence or willful and wanton misconduct.

Two conditions in that text carry weight: whether the person paid something of value, and whether the use was outdoor recreation of the kind the section describes. A paid visit to an indoor trampoline park and an unpaid jump on a friend's backyard trampoline present very different facts under that wording. Whether the statute applies, and whether its gross-negligence exception is met, depends on the facts of each situation.

If a landowner raises this statute, the details worth gathering are whether anything was paid, whether the trampoline was indoors or outdoors, and how the owner kept it. Those facts are what an attorney would look at first.