Estate of Lee F Hartin Jr v. Vista Grande Villa, 337216

Decedent Lee Hartin, a Sodexo employee working in Vista Grande Villa’s kitchen, slipped on ice in the employee parking lot after exiting the employee door in January 2014, sustaining injuries that led to death from a later pulmonary embolism.
Hartin’s personal representative (Dawn Simons) sued Vista Grande Villa alleging Hartin slipped on a hidden patch of black ice and that the defendant failed to remove or warn of the hazard.
Defendant moved for summary disposition under MCR 2.116(C)(10); the trial court granted the motion, finding the ice was an open and obvious danger and not effectively unavoidable.
Evidence showed below-freezing temperatures, recent snowfall, and snow on the ground the day of the fall; two witnesses at the scene did not recall seeing ice immediately after the fall.
Plaintiff argued factual disputes about visibility of the black ice and that Hartin, as an employee using the designated employee door, was effectively compelled to confront the hazard.
The Court of Appeals affirmed summary disposition, holding the black ice was open and obvious given the winter indicia and that Hartin was not effectively trapped because alternative exits and options to report hazards existed.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether black ice was an open and obvious danger	The ice was not visible after the fall and weather evidence conflicted, so a factual question exists	Winter conditions (freezing temps, snow on ground) provided indicia making black ice open and obvious	Open and obvious: yes — objective indicia (temps, snow) would alert a reasonable person
Whether the black ice was effectively unavoidable (special aspect)	Hartin, as an employee using the designated employee door, was required to confront the hazard	Employee status alone does not make a hazard unavoidable; alternative exits and reporting options were available	Not effectively unavoidable: Hartin had alternatives and could report/avoid the area
Admissibility/consideration of weather data at summary disposition	Weather data lacked foundation and was hearsay	Both parties submitted weather data; records are admissible with plausible foundation	Weather data properly considered; parties invited consideration by submitting it
Whether further discovery could change result based on photographs/water in lot	Additional discovery needed to show other exits also had ice so hazard was unavoidable	Photos did not show ice or hazards on alternative routes; no evidence that all routes were icy	Further discovery unlikely to establish effective unavoidability; summary disposition appropriate

Hoffner v. Lanctoe, 492 Mich 450 (open-and-obvious doctrine and special aspects including effective unavoidability)
Lugo v. Ameritech Corp., Inc., 464 Mich 512 (premises possessor duty to invitees and special aspects exception)
Janson v. Sajewski Funeral Home, Inc., 486 Mich 934 (black ice can be open and obvious with indicia of hazardous conditions)
Cole v. Henry Ford Health Sys., 497 Mich 881 (wintry conditions may be open and obvious where indicators exist)
Bullard v. Oakwood Annapolis Hosp., 308 Mich App 403 (employee status does not automatically make an open-and-obvious hazard effectively unavoidable)
Slaughter v. Blarney Castle Oil Co., 281 Mich App 474 (objective test for open-and-obvious hazards)