In Crite v Detroit Entmt, LLC, No. 329073, 2016 WL 7609137 (Mich Ct App December 29, 2016) a plaintiff alleging she fell because of an unreasonably hazardous walking surface connecting a dining area to a casino was not allowed to proceed to a jury trial. The plaintiff claimed that a ramped hallway leading from a hotel to a dining area in a casino, which had "sculpted carpet," caused her fall "because she could not tell that the floor was inclined and/or because her toe caught on "what [she] presumed" was a raised portion of the carpet." The Court of Appeals did not find this to be an unreasonable hazardous condition:

"[P]laintiff has presented no basis to conclude that a long hallway with a slight incline constitutes an unreasonably hazardous condition. Nor does she articulate why the “sculpted carpet” constitutes an unreasonable hazard. She presents no measurements demonstrating an excessive variation of carpet fibers. Moreover, we have reviewed the photographs and video evidence submitted to the trial court, and we agree with the trial court that they do not give rise to any question of material fact such that a jury could find the walkway to be unreasonably hazardous or not obvious upon casual inspection. Plaintiff does present an affidavit from one person stating that she has also tripped in the same hallway, but the affidavit offers no details or additional information that might support a jury finding that the hall is unreasonably dangerous. Plaintiff has failed to come forward with sufficient evidence to create a genuine factual issue about whether an ordinary user would have discovered the incline upon casual inspection."