Bicyclist injured on sidewalk entitled to trial after establishing question of fact whether it was closed
The City of Dearborn argued that Alfred Porada's case should be dismissed because he was injured while bicycling on a section of sidewalk that had been closed for construction. Porada claimed that the barricades barring travel and warning sidewalk users that construction was under way had been removed: the undisputed proof established that they were lying in a hold adjacent to the sidewalk at the time of his injury. He also provided proof that the barriers had been removed on a regular basis. The Court noted that the evidence presented by Porada created a question of fact with regard to whether the sidewalk was, in fact, effectively closed for public travel. If it was not, the City will be responsible if a defect in the sidewalk caused Porada's injuries.