A curb cutout that runs from a sidewalk to abut a county road is part of a county highway, but exists outside of that portion of the highway designed by vehicular travel. This conclusion from the Court of Appeals through Judge Murphy’s opinion in Moraccini v. City of Sterling Heights, No. 301678, resulted in Court affirming the trial court’s denial of the City of Sterling Heights motion for summary judgment arguing that it was immune from a suit alleging injury caused by a defect in such a curb cutout. The legal issues turned on MCL 691.1402, which excepts highways from governmental immunity, but also states that municipalities are generally not liable for injuries allegedly caused by a county highway. The statute, however, does state that in the event that a plaintiff can prove statutory knowledge and causation prerequisites, a municipality may be liable for defects in portions of county highways existing outside of the improved portion of the highway designed for vehicular travel, including sidewalks and “other installations.” The Court of Appeals concluded that because the general definition of highway explicitly includes “sidewalks”, it also includes a curb cutout of a sidewalk that abuts a county highway. Thus, the general highway exception to governmental immunity applies. The Court of Appeals, however, concluded that cutout was not designed for vehicular travel, and thus a municipality is not immune from suit alleging defects in that cutout.