Ellis v. HATCHEW

Michigan Supreme Court

Ellis v. HATCHEW

767 N.W.2d 451, 483 Mich. 1132

Michigan Supreme Court·Decided July 10, 2009·No. 138083·Published

Opinion

Leave to Appeal Denied July 10, 2009:

Court of Appeals No. 279930.

Kelly, C.J., and Cavanagh and Hathaway, JJ. We would reverse the judgment of the Court of Appeals because we are not persuaded that the trial court erred when it denied defendant’s motion for summary disposition. When the facts are viewed in a light most favorable to plaintiff, there were disputed issues of material fact relating to the applicability of the open and obvious danger doctrine.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Leave to Appeal Denied July 10, 2009:

Court of Appeals No. 279930.

Kelly, C.J., and Cavanagh and Hathaway, JJ. We would reverse the judgment of the Court of Appeals because we are not persuaded that the trial court erred when it denied defendant’s motion for summary disposition. When the facts are viewed in a light most favorable to plaintiff, there were disputed issues of material fact relating to the applicability of the open and obvious danger doctrine.

Ellis v. HATCHEW, 767 N.W.2d 451, 483 Mich. 1132 (Mich. 2009).

Pincite

767 N.W.2d 451 (Ellis v. HATCHEW) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.