Hensley v. THE MUSKIN CORP.

238 N.W.2d 362 | Mich. Ct. App. | 1975

65 Mich. App. 662 (1975)
238 N.W.2d 362

HENSLEY
v.
THE MUSKIN CORPORATION

Docket No. 22899.

Michigan Court of Appeals.

Decided August 18, 1975.

Benton, Hicks, Beltz, Behm & Nickola, for plaintiffs.

Plunkett, Cooney, Rutt, Watters, Stanczyk & *663 Pedersen (by John A. DeMoss and Charles A. Huckabay), for defendant The Muskin Corporation.

Robert P. Keil, for defendant Federal's, Inc.

Milliken & Magee, for defendant Smith.

Before: BASHARA, P.J., and J.H. GILLIS and M.F. CAVANAGH, JJ.

Leave to appeal denied, 395 Mich 776.

PER CURIAM.

Plaintiff, George Hensley, was permanently injured in a tragic accident. On June 20, 1971, he dove off a 7-foot high garage into a 4-foot deep swimming pool. The pool was owned by plaintiff's brother-in-law, Glenn Smith, and was located in Smith's backyard. Hensley sued the pool manufacturer, The Muskin Corporation, the retail seller, Federal's, Inc., and his brother-in-law, alleging breach of various warranties and negligence, as well as a theory of strict liability.

In essence, plaintiff alleges that defendants were under a duty to warn him that he should not dive into the pool. The record reveals that plaintiff was a 28-year-old person with some swimming experience and that he helped assemble the pool and knew full well that it was only 4 feet deep. Under these circumstances we feel that the trial judge correctly granted summary judgment for all defendants. Neither the manufacturer, the seller, nor the brother-in-law were under any duty to warn this plaintiff of an obviously dangerous use of an otherwise nondangerous product. Fisher v Johnson Milk Co, 383 Mich 158; 174 NW2d 752 (1970), Colosimo v May Department Co, 466 F2d 1234 (CA 3, 1972).

Affirmed. Costs to defendants.