Timothy Jones v. Daimlerchrysler Corp ( 2011 )

Order Michigan Supreme Court
Lansing, Michigan
February 4, 2011 Robert P. Young, Jr.,
Chief Justice
140889 Michael F. Cavanagh
Marilyn Kelly
Stephen J. Markman
Diane M. Hathaway
TIMOTHY JONES and CHRYSTAL JONES, Mary Beth Kelly
Plaintiffs-Appellees, Brian K. Zahra,
Justices
v SC: 140889
COA: 285099
Macomb CC: 2007-001010-NO
DAIMLERCHRYSLER CORPORATION,
Defendant-Appellant.
_________________________________________/
On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the January 7, 2010
judgment of the Court of Appeals is considered and, pursuant to MCR 7.302(H)(1), in
lieu of granting leave to appeal, we REVERSE that portion of the Court of Appeals
decision reinstating one aspect of the plaintiffs’ premises liability claim and we
REINSTATE the summary disposition ruling of the Macomb Circuit Court. The
defendant premises owner did not have a duty to protect the injured plaintiff, an
employee of an independent contractor hired to perform construction work on the
owner’s premises, from the hazardous condition that contributed to the plaintiff’s injury,
where the defendant delegated to the contractor the task of performing the construction
work. Banaszak v Northwest Airlines, Inc, 485 Mich 1034 (2010); Young v Delcor
Assoc, 477 Mich 931 (2006). Moreover, even if premises liability had applied, the
injured plaintiff could not have recovered where he was aware of the hazard, and indeed
had ordered its creation. Riddle v McLouth Steel Products Corp, 440 Mich 86 (1992).
The Court of Appeals theory of liability based on the presence, location and design of the
hinged metal floor hatch lacks legal and factual merit. The plaintiff, who ordered the
hatch to be opened, was not injured by the presence, location and design of the hatch, but
rather by falling through the hole that was created when the hatch was opened. An owner
of property cannot be held liable under premises liability law for a design of the property
that permits an invitee or person in control of the property to create a hazardous condition
where none existed before.
MARILYN KELLY, J., would grant leave to appeal.
HATHAWAY, J., would deny leave to appeal.
I, Corbin R. Davis, Clerk of the Michigan Supreme Court, certify that the
foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court.
February 4, 2011 _________________________________________
0201 Clerk