Buhalis v. Trinity Continuing Care Services
296 Mich. App. 685
| Mich. Ct. App. | 2012Background
- Premises possessor generally owes no duty to invitees to warn of or protect from open and obvious dangers unless special aspects exist; icy condition here deemed open and obvious.
- Plaintiff Buhalis slipped on ice on a patio adjacent to the main entrance; she parked a trike on the uncleared patio and then slipped after dismounting.
- Walkway to the entrance was cleared and awning directed meltwater to patio areas; patio itself was not salted or regularly maintained in winter.
- A sign warned that common areas may be wet, snow-covered, and slippery; Buhalis knew ice could form but claimed she did not see ice before the fall.
- Maintenance testimony: walkway was kept clear; snow/ice generally not removed from patios; ice visible on the patio where plaintiff fell.
- Court granted summary disposition for Trinity; consolidated appeals; held no special aspects and no duty to warn or protect beyond cleared path.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Is the ice on the patio open and obvious, negating duty? | Buhalis contends the ice was not open and obvious. | Trinity argues the ice is open and obvious under Michigan law. | Yes, the ice was open and obvious; no duty to warn or protect. |
| Did Trinity owe a duty to protect invitees on the patio when Buhalis strayed from a cleared path? | Buhalis argues implied invitation and duty to maintain the patio. | Trinity contends no duty beyond clearing the main path. | No duty to protect; no liability for ice on the patio. |
| Should Buhalis’ ordinary negligence claim have been dismissed in favor of premises liability principles? | Argues ordinary negligence theory applies due to defendant’s actions. | Maintains claim sounds in premises liability, not ordinary negligence. | Ordinary negligence claim should be dismissed; premises liability governs. |
Key Cases Cited
- Lugo v Ameritech Corp, Inc, 464 Mich 512 (2001) (open and obvious doctrine part of duty; need for reasonable care absent special aspects)
- Bertrand v Alan Ford, Inc, 449 Mich 606 (1995) (duty to invitees; public policy of self-protection; open and obvious analysis)
- Quinlivan v Great Atlantic & Pacific Tea Co, Inc, 395 Mich 244 (1975) (premises possessor duty to protect invitees from unreasonable hazards; ordinary care standard)
- Slaughter v Blarney Castle Oil Co, 281 Mich App 474 (2008) (open and obvious doctrine applied to snow/ice with possible imputed knowledge)
- Mann v Shusteric Enterprises, Inc, 470 Mich 320 (2004) (special aspects standard for snow/ice; general duty to diminish hazards limited)
- Nezworski v Mazanec, 301 Mich 43 (1942) (implied invitation doctrine; invitee status tests when access inferred)