In James Heuschneider v. Wolverine Superior Hospitality, Inc., unpublished per curium opinion of the Court of Appeals, issued June 4, 2019 (Docket No. 341053), the Michigan Court of Appeals held that innkeepers can be held liable for spider bites sustained by guests on their property.
While staying at the Comfort Inn & Suites in Ann Arbor, Michigan, plaintiff was bitten by a spider, which emergency room doctors believed to be a brown recluse spider. Because of the injuries caused by the venomous bite, plaintiff needed multiple surgeries to his leg and chest, as well as inpatient hospitalization and rehabilitation. Thereafter, plaintiff filed a complaint against defendant for damages, alleging four theories of liability: innkeeper’s liability, premises liability, ordinary negligence, and nuisance.
After plaintiff filed his complaint, defendant filed a motion for summary disposition, contending that (1) plaintiff could not prove proximate causation, and (2) defendant owed no duty of care to the plaintiff under the doctrine of ferae naturae. The doctrine of ferae naturae holds that a landowner cannot be held liable for the actions of wild animals on his or her property unless the animals were in the landowner’s possession or control. The trial court, relying in part on the affidavit of an entomology expert, held that spiders should be classified as wild animals. Since under the doctrine of ferae naturae, there is only a duty owed when the wild animal is under the control of an alleged tortfeasor, the trial court found this to be an absolute defense to all of the plaintiff’s claims and granted summary disposition in favor of defendant. In doing so, the trial court also rejected plaintiff’s argument that the spider was a type of vermin for which the innkeeper was responsible for under the innkeeper’s liability statute (“The owner of every dwelling shall be responsible for keeping the entire building free from vermin . . .”). MCL 125.474.
The Court of Appeals reversed the decision of the trial court. Specifically, the Court of Appeals found that spiders were a type of vermin, not a wild animal. Because the innkeeper’s liability statute does not define “vermin,” the Court of Appeals relied on the common meaning of the word. Specifically, the Court of Appeals relied on the dictionary’s definition of vermin as “small common harmful or objectionable animals (such as lice or fleas) that are difficult to control . . .” The Court of Appeals then concluded that spiders fit within the common meaning of vermin, and that the defendant therefore had a duty under statute to keep the property free from spiders.
A link to the opinion can be found here: https://law.justia.com/cases/michigan/court-of-appeals-unpublished/2019/341053.html
This article was written by Emily Honet, Law Clerk
