531 N.W.2d 724 (Mich.App. 1995), 161576, Parcher v. Detroit Edison Co.

Docket NºDocket No. 161576.
Citation531 N.W.2d 724, 209 Mich.App. 495
Opinion JudgePER CURIAM.
Party NameTheodore R. PARCHER, Jr., Yvonne M. Parcher, Individually and as Next Friend of Amanda Mae Parcher, a Minor, Plaintiffs-Appellants, v. The DETROIT EDISON COMPANY, a Michigan Corporation, Defendant-Appellee, and Parliament Company, a Foreign Corporation and Cideco, Inc., a Foreign Corporation, Defendants.
AttorneyPlunkett & Cooney, P.C. by Ernest R. Bazzana (Walter S. Schwartz, of counsel), Detroit, for Detroit Edison Co.
Judge PanelBefore CONNOR, P.J., and WAHLS and SAAD, JJ.
Case DateJanuary 24, 1995
CourtCourt of Appeals of Michigan

Page 724

531 N.W.2d 724 (Mich.App. 1995)

209 Mich.App. 495

Theodore R. PARCHER, Jr., Yvonne M. Parcher, Individually

and as Next Friend of Amanda Mae Parcher, a Minor,

Plaintiffs-Appellants,

v.

The DETROIT EDISON COMPANY, a Michigan Corporation, Defendant-Appellee,

and

Parliament Company, a Foreign Corporation and Cideco, Inc.,

a Foreign Corporation, Defendants.

Docket No. 161576.

Court of Appeals of Michigan.

January 24, 1995

Submitted Jan. 11, 1995, at Detroit.

Approved for Publication March 22, 1995, at 9:15 a.m.

Released for Publication May 24, 1995.

Page 725

Michael J. Mangapora, P.C. by Robert D. Kent-Bryant, Flint, for Theodore R. Parcher, Jr., and Yvonne M. Parcher.

Plunkett & Cooney, P.C. by Ernest R. Bazzana (Walter S. Schwartz, of counsel), Detroit, for Detroit Edison Co.

Before CONNOR, P.J., and WAHLS and SAAD, JJ.

PER CURIAM.

Plaintiffs appeal as of right from the trial court's order granting summary disposition[209 Mich.App. 496] in favor of The Detroit Edison Company (hereafter defendant). On appeal, plaintiffs claim that defendant should have foreseen the injuries that resulted and that it owed a duty to plaintiff Theodore Parcher. We affirm.

In July of 1990, Theodore Parcher (hereafter plaintiff) sustained serious and permanent injuries after scaffolding he was transporting on a forklift came in contact with an electrical wire owned by defendant. At the time of the accident, plaintiff was working on the construction of a Kroger store, and the uncollapsed scaffolding he was transporting was twenty-nine feet high. The electrical wire was thirty-five feet off the ground and sixty-seven feet from the building site. The evidence established that Detroit Edison was aware of the building project and that one of its poles would have to be moved in order to accommodate the parking lot at the new store. Detroit Edison was not in violation of any safety regulations at the time of the accident, but, by operating the forklift within ten feet of the wire, plaintiff had violated safety standards adopted pursuant to M.C.L. § 408.1016; M.S.A. § 17.50(16) as 1979 AC, R 408.11936. A few days before the accident, the electrical foreman had warned workers of the wire, and plaintiff was aware of the location of the wire.

The trial court ruled that defendant did not owe plaintiff a legal duty to move...

To continue reading

Request your trial
7 practice notes
  • 553 N.W.2d 654 (Mich.App. 1996), 179277, State Treasurer v. Sheko
    • United States
    • Michigan Court of Appeals of Michigan
    • September 27, 1996
    ...check. 2 Defendant appeals as of right. We review the trial court's grant of summary disposition de novo. Parcher v. Detroit Edison Co, 209 Mich.App. 495, 497, 531 N.W.2d 724 (1995). On appeal, defendant argues that the trial court's grant of summary disposition for plaintiff was error beca......
  • Martin v. Department of Corrections, 091796 MICA, 186566
    • United States
    • Michigan Court of Appeals of Michigan
    • September 17, 1996
    ...de novo as a question of law a trial court's determination concerning a motion for summary disposition. Parcher v Detroit Edison Co, 209 Mich.App. 495, 497; 531 N.W.2d 724 (1995). Generally, a motion under MCR 2.116(C)(8) tests the legal sufficiency of a claim by looking to the pleadings al......
  • Thrift v. Edison, 101596 MICA, 182045
    • United States
    • Michigan Court of Appeals of Michigan
    • October 15, 1996
    ...that, in order to find a duty, the defendant must at least be notified of the activities near power lines. Parcher v Detroit Edison Co, 209 Mich.App. 495, 496-499; 531 N.W.2d 724 (1995), lv granted 450 Mich. 998 (1996). Furthermore, where the plaintiff is aware of the location of wires and ......
  • Bennett v. State, 121396 MICA, 191090
    • United States
    • Michigan Court of Appeals of Michigan
    • December 13, 1996
    ...work. This Court reviews de novo a trial court's determination regarding motions for summary disposition. Parcher v Detroit Edison Co, 209 Mich.App. 495, 497; 531 N.W.2d 724 (1995). This Court's task is to review the record evidence, including all reasonable inferences drawn from such evide......
  • Request a trial to view additional results
7 cases
  • 553 N.W.2d 654 (Mich.App. 1996), 179277, State Treasurer v. Sheko
    • United States
    • Michigan Court of Appeals of Michigan
    • September 27, 1996
    ...check. 2 Defendant appeals as of right. We review the trial court's grant of summary disposition de novo. Parcher v. Detroit Edison Co, 209 Mich.App. 495, 497, 531 N.W.2d 724 (1995). On appeal, defendant argues that the trial court's grant of summary disposition for plaintiff was error beca......
  • Martin v. Department of Corrections, 091796 MICA, 186566
    • United States
    • Michigan Court of Appeals of Michigan
    • September 17, 1996
    ...de novo as a question of law a trial court's determination concerning a motion for summary disposition. Parcher v Detroit Edison Co, 209 Mich.App. 495, 497; 531 N.W.2d 724 (1995). Generally, a motion under MCR 2.116(C)(8) tests the legal sufficiency of a claim by looking to the pleadings al......
  • Thrift v. Edison, 101596 MICA, 182045
    • United States
    • Michigan Court of Appeals of Michigan
    • October 15, 1996
    ...that, in order to find a duty, the defendant must at least be notified of the activities near power lines. Parcher v Detroit Edison Co, 209 Mich.App. 495, 496-499; 531 N.W.2d 724 (1995), lv granted 450 Mich. 998 (1996). Furthermore, where the plaintiff is aware of the location of wires and ......
  • Bennett v. State, 121396 MICA, 191090
    • United States
    • Michigan Court of Appeals of Michigan
    • December 13, 1996
    ...work. This Court reviews de novo a trial court's determination regarding motions for summary disposition. Parcher v Detroit Edison Co, 209 Mich.App. 495, 497; 531 N.W.2d 724 (1995). This Court's task is to review the record evidence, including all reasonable inferences drawn from such evide......
  • Request a trial to view additional results