Bullard v. Oakwood Annapolis Hospital
308 Mich. App. 403
| Mich. Ct. App. | 2014Background
- Bullard, a maintenance electrician employed by a contractor, performed monthly inspections of a rooftop generator reachable only by climbing ladders, crossing a catwalk, and walking across three unsecured 2x8 planks about 5–6 feet above the roof.
- He asked hospital maintenance on Feb 22 to clear snow from the path; on Feb 23 maintenance had cleared the stone path, catwalk, and planks.
- At about 4:00–4:30 AM (dark, cold), Bullard went to the roof, stepped onto a wooden plank, slipped on ice on the plank, fell, and was injured.
- Bullard sued Oakwood for premises negligence, alleging Oakwood failed to remove the dangerous ice and that the ice was unavoidable in performing his job.
- The trial court found the ice open and obvious but denied defendant’s summary-disposition motion on the ground a question of fact existed whether the ice had “special aspects” (unreasonably dangerous or effectively unavoidable).
- The Court of Appeals limited the appeal to whether the ice was (1) unreasonably dangerous in itself or (2) effectively unavoidable, and reviewed the grant of summary disposition de novo.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the ice was "unreasonably dangerous" in itself | Bullard: his injuries show the ice was unreasonably dangerous | Oakwood: ice generally does not pose a substantial risk of death or severe injury and is not unreasonably dangerous | Court: Not unreasonably dangerous — comparable precedent (Perkoviq) treats rooftop ice as not unreasonably dangerous |
| Whether the ice was "effectively unavoidable" | Bullard: planks were the only way to access the generator, so he was required to confront the ice | Oakwood: Bullard had choices (ask for clearing, wait for daylight, decline inspection, turn back) so the hazard was avoidable | Court: Not effectively unavoidable — Bullard could have avoided the hazard; no inescapable requirement to confront it |
Key Cases Cited
- Hoffner v. Lanctoe, 492 Mich 450 (Mich. 2012) (explains narrow exceptions to the open-and-obvious doctrine and defines “special aspects” including "effectively unavoidable")
- Lugo v. Ameritech Corp., Inc., 464 Mich 512 (Mich. 2001) (discusses landowner duty to invitees and that an open-and-obvious danger ordinarily precludes liability absent special aspects)
- Perkoviq v. Delcor Homes–Lake Shore Pointe, Ltd., 466 Mich 11 (Mich. 2002) (holds ice/frost on rooftop slats is not an unreasonably dangerous condition)
- Joyce v. Rubin, 249 Mich App 231 (Mich. Ct. App. 2002) (describes "effectively trapped" standard for unavoidable hazards)
- West v. General Motors Corp., 469 Mich 177 (Mich. 2003) (summarizes de novo standard of review for summary disposition)