Michigan ATV, UTV and Side-by-Side Accident Lawyer

What Michigan Law Covers After an Off-Highway Vehicle Accident

Michigan injury claims run on the Michigan Compiled Laws, the state's own statute book. This page covers three kinds of off-highway vehicles. The first is the all-terrain vehicle (ATV), a straddle-seat machine steered with handlebars. The second is the utility task vehicle (UTV). The third is the side-by-side, where riders sit next to each other.

A few Michigan rules frame almost every case:

• Section 600.5805 of the Michigan Compiled Laws sets a three-year limitation period for injury and death actions. It sets the same three-year period for a products liability action.
• Section 600.5851 of the Michigan Compiled Laws gives a person who was under 18 when the claim accrued one year after that disability is removed.
• Separate statutes govern fault, product-case damages, death claims and landowners. Each is covered below.

For an injured rider, these rules decide whether a claim can be brought at all and how much of a loss it may cover. A first question worth weighing is when the crash happened and whether the injured person was under 18 at the time.

The federal Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC) also keeps a state-level record. In its 2025 Report of Deaths and Injuries Involving Off-Highway Vehicles with More than Two Wheels, CPSC's Table 4 lists the total fatal incidents and deaths from off-highway vehicle incidents attributed to each state for 2020 through 2022. The states with the most reported deaths were California (166), Pennsylvania (140), Georgia (136), Kentucky (136) and West Virginia (115). CPSC notes that the counts are "not adjusted for state-level demographic characteristics (i.e., total population, age distribution)." The counts also "reflect the state and year in which the incident occurred." CPSC adds that it received "limited or no death certificate data from a handful of states." The figure is a count, not a finding about any rider, vehicle or company.

How the Type of Crash Shapes a Michigan Claim

Nationally, CPSC reports that overturns and collisions with another vehicle or with a stationary object, like a tree, were the most common hazards in off-highway vehicle deaths. Occupants were frequently ejected in those incidents. A rollover means the vehicle tips onto its side or roof. Michigan riders face the same kinds of events: rollovers on slopes, ejections, fires, crashes with other machines, and collisions at trail and road crossings.

Each event can point toward a different legal theory. These theories are separate, and one does not prove another:

• Recreational negligence asks whether another rider, a driver or an owner who let someone ride failed to use reasonable care, and whether that failure caused the injury.
• Premises or landowner liability asks what the person who owns or controls the land owed the rider.
• Product liability asks whether the vehicle or a part, such as a restraint, door, steering or brake component, was defective and whether that defect caused the injury.

A rollover or crash alone does not show a defect, or that anyone was careless. A detailed guide to UTV rollover claims covers that distinction further.

Michigan's recreational-use statute matters for land claims. Section 324.73301 of the Michigan Compiled Laws applies to a person on another's land who has not paid the owner, tenant or lessee "a valuable consideration." It covers uses such as "motorcycling, snowmobiling, or any other outdoor recreational use or trail use, with or without permission." For that person, the statute provides that no cause of action arises against the owner, tenant or lessee "unless the injuries were caused by the gross negligence or willful and wanton misconduct" of that person. A similar rule covers Michigan trailways and other public trails.

If you were riding on someone else's land without paying, this rule can narrow a claim against the landowner to gross negligence or willful and wanton misconduct. Whether it applies turns on the land, the activity and whether anything was paid, so details such as who owned the property and any fee or permit are worth noting.

Federal law adds one more layer, for ATVs only. Under 15 U.S.C. § 2089, new ATVs sold in the United States must meet a mandatory federal standard. That statute defines an ATV as a motorized off-highway vehicle "designed to travel on 3 or 4 wheels, having a seat designed to be straddled by the operator and handlebars for steering control." That definition does not reach a UTV or side-by-side. The site's page on the CPSC ATV safety standard explains it.

Who May Be Responsible After a Michigan Off-Highway Vehicle Crash

The possible defendants fall into a handful of categories, and the law asks something different of each one.

• Vehicle manufacturers and component makers. In a product claim, the question is whether the vehicle or part had a defect and whether that defect caused the injury.
• Sellers and dealers. Their role in a product claim depends on what they sold and what they did with it.
• Landowners and trail or property operators. Their duty is shaped by the recreational-use statute described above, where it applies.
• Other riders, drivers and vehicle owners. Negligence asks about duty, breach, causation and damages.

For you, the category matters because each theory rests on different proof. If the vehicle had a defect that caused your injury, the machine and its records carry the case. If another rider was careless, how people behaved is the focus. If the land was the problem, the question is who controlled the property and what they knew.

Michigan also limits how far one defendant's responsibility reaches. Under section 600.6304 of the Michigan Compiled Laws, when more than one person's fault is involved, the jury finds each plaintiff's total damages and the percentage of fault of everyone who contributed, including nonparties and people already released. Liability "is several only and not joint." Except as the section provides, a person pays no more than their own percentage of fault. That rule does not apply to a defendant who is jointly and severally liable under section 6312. For an injured rider, this means a share of fault assigned to someone who is not in the case can reduce what the named defendants pay. Listing everyone who may have played a part is one way to see how that allocation could look, and an attorney can help sort out which parties belong in the case.

Michigan's Fault Rules and What They Mean for Your Claim

A question many injured riders carry quietly is whether their own choices on the trail end the matter. Michigan answers it with comparative fault, a rule that divides responsibility by percentage.

Section 600.2959 of the Michigan Compiled Laws directs courts in personal injury, property damage and wrongful death actions to reduce damages by the injured person's percentage of comparative fault. It states:

"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 percentage of fault is greater than the aggregate fault of the other person or persons, whether or not parties to the action, the court shall reduce economic damages by the percentage of comparative fault... and noneconomic damages shall not be awarded."

In plain terms, if you were partly at fault, any damages are reduced by your percentage. If your percentage is greater than everyone else's combined, economic damages are still reduced, and noneconomic damages, such as pain and suffering, are not awarded. The fault of people who are not parties still counts in that comparison, which ties back to section 600.6304.

In off-highway cases, fault arguments often focus on rider conduct: speed, alcohol, riding without a helmet or other protective gear, carrying passengers, and how warnings were followed. How much weight these carry depends on the evidence and on how they relate to the injury. A person in this position may weigh what the scene, the vehicle and witnesses show about those points, and an attorney can help assess how fault might be divided.

Damages Michigan Law May Allow — and the Limits That Apply

Damages in an injury case usually come in two groups. Economic losses include medical expenses and lost income. Noneconomic losses include pain and suffering. What Michigan law may allow in a given case depends on the facts, the legal theory and the fault findings described above.

One limit applies only in a product liability action. Section 600.2946a of the Michigan Compiled Laws caps noneconomic damages in those cases. Its base figures are $280,000. That rises to $500,000 if the defect caused the person's death or the permanent loss of a vital bodily function. The statute directs the state treasurer to adjust these limits at the end of each calendar year so they match the limits in section 1483. The current figures are therefore the treasurer's adjusted amounts, not the base numbers.

If your claim is a product case, the section also shapes how a verdict is reached. The jury lists economic and noneconomic losses separately, is not told about the limits by the court or the lawyers, and the court then trims any noneconomic award to fit the cap. The higher limit for death or loss of a vital bodily function does not apply to a defendant if the jury finds gross negligence by a preponderance of the evidence, or if the court finds the matters in section 2949a true.

This cap is written for product liability. A negligence claim against another rider, for example, is not a product liability action. For a family weighing different theories, that difference can affect what pain and suffering may be recovered, and it is one question an attorney can help weigh.

Filing Deadlines Under Michigan Law

Section 600.5805 sets most of the time limits. It provides that "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." That rule applies "except as otherwise provided in this section."

The same section sets "3 years for a products liability action." It adds that for a product "in use for not less than 10 years," the plaintiff must prove a prima facie case "without the benefit of any presumption." Other provisions of current Michigan law, including any period of repose, can also bear on product claims. A period of repose is an outer time limit that can run regardless of when the injury happened.

A missed limitation period can bar a claim entirely.

For a child, section 600.5851 applies, except as its subsections 7 and 8 provide. If the person was under 18 when the claim accrued, the person has "1 year after the disability is removed... although the period of limitations has run." Disabilities cannot be stacked, and only those that existed when the claim first accrued count.

A crash blamed on a defective highway has its own notice rule. Under section 691.1404 of the Michigan Compiled Laws, the injured person must serve notice on the governmental agency within 120 days from the injury. The notice must state the exact location and nature of the defect, the injury, and the names of known witnesses.

For an injured person under 18, the limit is not more than 180 days. A parent, attorney, next friend or guardian may file it. For a person physically or mentally unable to give notice, it is 180 days after the disability ends. Notice against the state is filed in triplicate with the clerk of the court of claims.

When a period began and which rule governs depends on the facts. If you want help sorting out which deadline applies to your situation, you can request a case evaluation.

What Evidence Can Show in a Michigan ATV or UTV Case

After a crash, families often find that the records they need are scattered across a hospital, a garage and a phone. Each type of evidence speaks to a different part of the law described above.

• The vehicle, its components and the riders' equipment. In a product claim, the physical machine is often central to whether a defect existed.
• Medical records and bills. These show the injuries, the treatment and the damages.
• Photos, video and scene details. These help show how the crash happened, which bears on both causation and fault.
• Incident and police reports, which form part of the factual record.
• Witnesses' names and contact details.
• Purchase records, the owner's manual and the warning labels. These bear on product claims and on comparative fault.
• Recall records. Federal law, at 15 U.S.C. § 2064, lets the CPSC order public notice, repair, replacement or refund for a product that presents a "substantial product hazard."

What is at stake is proof: if the vehicle is repaired or discarded, or records are lost, a defect or fault question may be harder to answer. A recall is not a finding that a product injured anyone. The site's ATV accident statistics page explains CPSC's national figures.

When a Family Brings a Wrongful Death Claim After a Fatal Michigan ATV or UTV Accident

When a crash takes a life, Michigan law allows a claim to continue past the death. Section 600.2922 of the Michigan Compiled Laws provides that when a death is caused by "wrongful act, neglect, or fault of another," the person or corporation that would have been liable had the person lived remains liable. This applies "although the death was caused under circumstances that constitute a felony."

The family does not file in their own names. "Every action under this section shall be brought by, and in the name of, the personal representative of the estate of the deceased." A personal representative is the person appointed to act for the estate. Within 30 days after filing, the personal representative must serve the complaint and notice on those "who may be entitled to damages under subsection (3)." Which relatives those are, and which damages are allowed, follow the current text of section 600.2922 on the Legislature's page.

The other rules on this page still apply. The three-year period in section 600.5805 covers actions for a person's death, and the comparative-fault reduction in section 600.2959 applies to wrongful death as well. For a grieving family, the questions to weigh are usually who serves as personal representative, who may share in any damages and how fault will be weighed. Each depends on the relationships and the facts, and a conversation with an attorney can help sort them out. The site's ATV accident lawyer guide covers these theories more generally.