Lowrey v. Lmps & Lmpj, Inc
313 Mich. App. 500
| Mich. Ct. App. | 2015Background
- Lowrey slip-and-fall on wet, snow-tracked stairs at Woody’s Diner (KSK) during late-night/early-morning hours; bouncers directed patrons to exit; stairs crowded and wet from snow and salt; plaintiff sues LMPS & LMPJ and KSK (d/b/a Woody’s Diner) for premises liability; trial court granted KSK summary disposition under MCR 2.116(C)(10) for lack of notice; on appeal, Lowrey argues KSK failed to show lack of notice and that issue requires jury questions; reversed and remanded for further proceedings.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Was there a genuine issue of material fact on KSK’s actual notice? | Lowrey asserts KSK had actual notice via employee knowledge. | KSK argues no knowledge of wet stairs; manager testified no reports of spills. | No; court held KSK failed to prove lack of actual notice; issue should have been denied. |
| Was there a genuine issue of material fact on constructive notice via reasonable inspection? | Lowrey contends reasonable inspection would have found hazard. | KSK claimed no constructive notice; relied on casual inspection arguments. | Yes; trial court erred; insufficient proof of lack of constructive notice; burden did not shift. |
| Is there a fact question on causation linking the wet stairs to Lowrey’s injury? | Lowrey contends liquid on stairs caused fall. | KSK asserts no proven liquid cause or its duration. | There is a factual dispute; jury could determine causation favored Lowrey. |
| Does the open and obvious doctrine bar Lowrey’s claim? | Open-and-obvious standard was not proven; condition not obviously discoverable. | Stairs could be open and obvious under some circumstances. | Not dispositive; issue should go to jury; not established as matter of law. |
Key Cases Cited
- Quinto v Cross & Peters Co, 451 Mich 358; 547 NW2d 314 (1996) (Mich. 1996) (burden-shifting framework for summary disposition; need specific, unrebutted facts)
- Barnard Mfg Co, Inc v Gates Performance Engineering, Inc., 285 Mich App 362; 775 NW2d 618 (2009) (Mich. Ct. App. 2009) (initial burden on moving party; proper support required)
- Napier v Jacobs, 429 Mich 222; 414 NW2d 862 (1987) (Mich. 1987) (jury determines duty and standard of care; open questions of fact)
- Skinner v Square D Co, 445 Mich 153; 518 NW2d 875 (1994) (Mich. 1994) (summary disposition requires no genuine issue of material fact; burden on moving party)
- Merryman v Hall, 131 Mich 406; 91 NW 647 (1902) (Mich. 1902) (premises liability inspection considerations; historical standard)