Bradford v. Feeback, Docket No. 82070

• Decision Date: 05 May 1986
• Docket Number: Docket No. 82070
• Citation: 149 Mich.App. 67,385 N.W.2d 729
• Parties: Patrick BRADFORD and Therese Bradford, Plaintiffs-Appellants, v. Clifford FEEBACK and Mary Feeback, Defendants-Appellees, and John Van Aelst and Louis Van Aelst, Defendants. 149 Mich.App. 67, 385 N.W.2d 729
• Court: Court of Appeal of Michigan — District of US

Page 729

385 N.W.2d 729

Patrick BRADFORD and Therese Bradford Plaintiffs-Appellants, v. Clifford FEEBACK and Mary Feeback, Defendants-Appellees and John Van Aelst and Louis Van Aelst, Defendants.

Docket No. 82070.

149 Mich.App. 67, 385 N.W.2d 729

Court of Appeals of Michigan.

Submitted Dec. 10, 1985.

Decided Feb. 5, 1986.

Released for Publication May 5, 1986.

[149 MICHAPP 69] Sprik & Andersen, P.C. by Dale R. Sprik, Grand Rapids, for plaintiffs-appellants.

Nelson & Krueger, P.C. by Steven L. Kreuger, Grand Rapids, for defendants-appellees.

Before ALLEN, P.J., and R.B. BURNS and KAUFMAN ^*, JJ.

PER CURIAM.

Plaintiffs appeal from a December 3, 1984, order granting defendants' motion for summary judgment pursuant to GCR 1963, 117.2(1). We affirm.

On May 1, 1983, defendants-appellees Clifford and Mary Feeback (defendants) hosted a communion party for two of their grandchildren at their Comstock Park residence. Defendants invited guests Patrick and Therese Bradford (plaintiffs), their son Mickole Bradford, defendant Louis Van Aelst and his wife Helen, their son John Van Aelst, and others. Mickole Bradford and other children began playing in a wooded area behind defendants' home and, after entering the woods, defendant John Van Aelst began tossing what plaintiffs refer to as "wooden projectiles" at the other children. The "wooden projectiles" were sticks that had fallen off trees.

Mickole was injured when one of the sticks thrown by John Van Aelst bounced off a tree and struck him in the left eye. Mickole sustained serious injury to the left eye, including detachment of the retina, a lacerated cornea and iris, a cataract, and a total and permanent loss of sight in the eye.

Plaintiffs alleged that defendants, having invited and encouraged the presence of numerous infants [149 MICHAPP 70] and children on the premises and having permitted them to play in the wooded area behind their home, had a duty to Mickole to supervise and watch over the children in order to protect them from harm or to warn them of any dangerous conditions and the risk involved. Plaintiffs alleged that defendants were negligent in failing to exercise reasonable care to make conditions safe for the children by removing dangerous objects and articles from behind their home when they knew that the conditions as they existed posed an unreasonable risk of harm. Plaintiffs further alleged that defendants were negligent in failing to warn Mickole and his parents of the dangerous conditions behind their home when they knew or should have known that such conditions involved an unreasonable risk of harm to Mickole and the other children.

Defendants filed a motion for summary judgment under GCR 1963, 117.2(1), alleging that plaintiffs had failed to state a cause of action upon which relief could be granted. A hearing on the motion was held and at the conclusion the court granted defendants' motion for summary judgment.

Plaintiffs and Mickole were invited onto defendants' property as social guests. Defendants' liability must, therefore, be examined under a licensee analysis. SJI2d 19.01 defines a "licensee" as "a person who, other than for a business purpose, enters another's land with the express or implied permission of the owner or person in control of the land. A social guest is a licensee, not an invitee".

In Preston v. Sleziak, 383 Mich. 442, 453, 175 N.W.2d 759 (1970), the Court, quoting 2 Restatement Torts, 2d, Sec. 342, p. 210, set forth the duties which occupiers of land owe their licensees:

[149 MICHAPP 71] " 'A possessor of land is...