Michigan Court of Appeals Expands Condominium Associations’ Duty to Short-Term Rental Guests

In a significant published decision, the Michigan Court of Appeals has held that a short-term rental guest is an “invitee” of a condominium association while using common elements maintained by the association. The decision, Letvin v Village at Grand Traverse Commons Condominium Association, Michigan Court of Appeals Docket No. 376558, was issued on July 13, 2026.

What Happened?

The plaintiff and his wife rented a condominium unit through Airbnb for a weekend in Traverse City. While walking across an icy condominium parking lot to reach an Uber, the plaintiff slipped, fell, and broke his arm.

The condominium association had hired a contractor to perform snow removal and salting. Evidence nevertheless indicated that ice remained in the parking lot. More importantly for association boards, the record included testimony that the board did not monitor the contractor’s work and that the contractor was unaware of anyone associated with the condominium inspecting its performance.

The trial court dismissed the claim after concluding that the renter was merely a “licensee,” to whom the association owed a comparatively limited duty. The Court of Appeals reversed.

The Court’s Decision

The Court held, as a matter of first impression, that a short-term rental guest is an invitee of the condominium association when using common elements maintained by the association.

An invitee is owed the highest duty recognized under Michigan premises-liability law. That duty requires the party possessing and controlling the property to exercise reasonable care to protect invitees from unreasonable risks of harm. Depending on the circumstances, this can require reasonable inspections, repairs, warnings, and measures to address snow and ice.

The Court did not find that the condominium association was negligent. Instead, it held that the evidence—including the remaining ice and questions concerning oversight of the snow-removal contractor—created factual issues for a jury. The case was therefore returned to the trial court for further proceedings.

Because Letvin is a published Court of Appeals decision, it has precedential effect unless subsequently reversed or modified.

What Should Michigan Associations Do?

The practical lesson is not that every accident produces liability. It is that hiring a contractor does not end the association’s risk-management responsibilities. A contract, regrettably, is not a force field.

Condominium boards should consider taking the following steps:

• Review snow-removal and property-maintenance contracts to ensure that inspection, treatment, reporting, and emergency-response responsibilities are clearly defined.
• Establish a reasonable process for monitoring contractor performance, particularly during significant weather events.
• Require written service records showing when inspections, plowing, salting, repairs, and follow-up visits occurred.
• Create a prompt procedure for owners, residents, guests, and managers to report hazardous common-area conditions.
• Preserve photographs, weather information, contractor records, witness information, and communications following an incident.
• Review insurance, indemnification, additional-insured, and notice provisions with legal counsel and the association’s insurance professional.

The express holding in Letvin concerns condominium associations and short-term rental guests. It does not separately decide the duties owed by a subdivision HOA. Nevertheless, HOA boards responsible for the possession, control, or maintenance of private roads, sidewalks, recreational facilities, or other shared property should take the Court’s reasoning seriously.

Letvin reinforces a broader point: when an association controls and agrees to maintain shared property, courts will examine not only whether maintenance was assigned to a contractor, but also whether reasonable inspection and oversight actually occurred.