## Facts

- A nonprofit YMCA operated multiple community programs in one building, including a residence program providing single-occupancy rooms to low- and moderate-income individuals.
- The residence floors were dormitory-like, with furnished rooms and communal bathrooms; occupants did not have self-contained apartments.
- Many occupants were referred by local human-service agencies that often paid for or guaranteed room charges; the YMCA also provided support services such as counseling and employment assistance.
- The YMCA used written occupancy agreements labeling itself a “hotel” and the occupants “guests.”
- The agreements reserved significant control to the YMCA, including retaining keys and entry rights for security, inspection, and maintenance.
- The agreements restricted occupants’ use of rooms (including limits on storing food or belongings and limits on visitors) and allowed the YMCA to terminate occupancy without stating a reason.
- A tenants’ rights organization sued for declaratory relief seeking a ruling that occupants were tenants and that landlord-tenant statutes applied.
- The trial court ruled the relationship was landlord-tenant and applied several landlord statutes, but did not decide a separate consumer-protection issue.

## Issues

1. Whether the legal relationship between the YMCA and room occupants was landlord-tenant or hotel-guest under Michigan law.
2. If the relationship was hotel-guest, whether landlord-focused statutes (including the Truth in Renting Act, the landlord-tenant relationship act, and the forcible entry and detainer anti-lockout statute) were inapplicable.

## Decision

- The Michigan Court of Appeals reversed the trial court.
- The court held the YMCA’s residence operation fit the statutory concept of a hotel/public lodging house and the occupants were guests.
- Because the relationship was hotel-guest, the court held that landlord-tenant statutes did not apply to the YMCA’s residence program.
- The court concluded the trial court clearly erred in finding a landlord-tenant relationship based on the facts and governing distinctions between tenancies and lodging.

## Legal Principles

- A landlord-tenant relationship generally requires conveyance of a possessory interest and the tenant’s exclusive legal possession and control of the premises.
- A hotel-guest relationship generally involves a revocable right of occupancy where the proprietor retains substantial control and does not convey a possessory interest.
- Statutory definitions and how an establishment holds itself out to the public are significant in classifying an operation as a hotel/public lodging house.
- Where an operator provides day-to-day lodging, retains keys and access, reserves broad termination rights, and imposes substantial use restrictions, those features tend to negate exclusive possession and support a hotel-guest classification.

## Conclusion

The court classified the YMCA’s residence occupants as hotel guests rather than tenants because the YMCA retained substantial control and did not grant exclusive possession, making landlord-tenant statutes inapplicable to the residence program.


Ann Arbor Tenants Union v. Ann Arbor YMCA, 581 N.W.2d 794 (Mich. Ct. App. 1998)