Experience, expertise and common sense.
Is “Open and Obvious” About to Take a Big Fall?
This week, in Kandil-Elsayed v F & E Oil, Inc, ___ Mich ___ (2022) (Docket No. 162907), the Michigan Supreme Court directed the Clerk “to schedule oral argument on the application” and directed the parties to file supplemental briefs addressing, among other things, “whether Lugo v Ameritech Corp, Inc, 464 Mich 512 (2001), is consistent with Michigan’s comparative negligence framework….”
While this is only a “mini-oral argument” – and the Court could still deny leave without addressing the merits – the Order could foreshadow an important change in how the open and obvious doctrine is applied.
To access the full article: https://bit.ly/3oxdWnb