Compau v. Pioneer Res. Co., Docket No. 151618.

Decision Date25 November 2015
Docket NumberCOA No. 320615.,Docket No. 151618.
Citation871 N.W.2d 210 (Mem),498 Mich. 928
Parties Michele COMPAU and Todd Compau, Plaintiffs–Appellees, v. PIONEER RESOURCE COMPANY, LLC, Walter A. Kilbourn, d/b/a Whittemore Inn, and Whittemore Inn Race Club, Defendants–Appellants.
CourtMichigan Supreme Court
Order

On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the April 16, 2015 judgment of the Court of Appeals is considered and, pursuant to MCR 7.305(H)(1), in lieu of granting leave to appeal, we REVERSE in part the judgment of the Court of Appeals and we REINSTATE the February 19, 2014 order of the Iosco Circuit Court that granted the defendants' motion for summary disposition. The plaintiffs' injuries arose when plaintiff Michele Compau tripped over a railroad tie on the defendants' property. When a plaintiff's injury arises from an allegedly dangerous condition on the land, the action sounds in premises liability rather than ordinary negligence, even when the plaintiff alleges that the premises possessor created the condition giving rise to the plaintiffs injury. Buhalis v. Trinity Continuing Care Servs., 296 Mich.App. 685, 692, 822 N.W.2d 254 (2012). The railroad tie was an allegedly dangerous condition on the land, but it was open and obvious. Thus, the plaintiffs' recovery is barred by the open and obvious danger doctrine. Lugo v. Ameritech Corp., Inc., 464 Mich. 512, 516–519, 522, 629 N.W.2d 384 (2001). Because plaintiff Michele Compau testified that she had seen the railroad tie when she arrived to watch the lawn mower races, the plaintiffs have failed to present evidence to support that the lawn mower races were so distracting as to preclude application of the open and obvious danger doctrine. See Kennedy v. Great Atlantic & Pacific Tea Co., 274 Mich.App. 710, 717–718, 737 N.W.2d 179 (2007).

BERNSTEIN, J., would deny leave to appeal.

To continue reading

Request your trial
7 cases
  • Wilson v. BRK, Inc.
    • United States
    • Court of Appeal of Michigan — District of US
    • May 30, 2019
    ...that the premises possessor created the condition giving rise to the plaintiff's injury." Id. ; see also Compau v. Pioneer Resource Co., LLC , 498 Mich. 928, 871 N.W.2d 210 (2015). The open and obvious danger doctrine is inapplicable to a claim of ordinary negligence. Laier v. Kitchen , 266......
  • Spencer v. Dte Elec. Co.
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — Eastern District of Michigan
    • January 17, 2017
    ...[a premises liability] claim into one for ordinary negligence." Buhalis, 822 N.W.2d at 258; see also Compau v. Pioneer Resource Co., LLC, 498 Mich. 928, 871 N.W.2d 210 (2015) ("When a plaintiff's injury arises from an allegedly dangerous condition on the land, the action sounds in premises ......
  • Ford v. City of Marshall
    • United States
    • Court of Appeal of Michigan — District of US
    • January 13, 2022
    ...asserted that she "tripped on the obscured barricade support and fell, suffering injury." Thus, much like the claims set forth in Finazzo and Compau, plaintiffs arose from an allegedly dangerous condition on the land. Accordingly, plaintiffs claim sounded in premises liability rather than o......
  • Kerban v. Kohl's Dep't Stores, Inc., Case No. 2:16-CV-168
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — Western District of Michigan
    • March 14, 2017
    ...alleges that the premises possessor created the condition giving rise to the plaintiffs [sic] injury." Compau v. Pioneer Res.Page 5 Co., 498 Mich. 928, 871 N.W.2d 210 (2015), reconsideration denied, 499 Mich. 872, 875 N.W.2d 198, (2016) (citing Buhalis v. Trinity Continuing Care Servs., 296......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT