Appellate court reluctantly applies open and obvious doctrine in snow and ice case involving claim of ordinary negligence.
Michigan Supreme Court ruling reinforces open and obvious doctrine in black ice case.
Michigan Supreme Court gives premises owners early holiday present, ruling “reasonable inspection” not required in slip and fall claim.
This final installment of our four-part incident documentation series takes a look at the power of surveillance video and photos... or the lack thereof.
Part three of this four-part premises liability series focuses on the strategic issues one should consider when collecting witness statements as part of an incident report procedure.
In this second part of our four-part series on premises liability documentation, we take a look at the importance of detailed incident reports as a means for defending against a plaintiff's slip, trip and fall claim.
Proper incident inspections are the focus of this post, which is the first in a four-part series on premises liability documentation best practices.
Appellate court reverses trial court ruling favoring bar owner in premises liability case, and in so doing, creates notice and open and obvious doctrine questions of fact.
The Michigan Supreme Court recently doubled-down on the plain meaning of "open and obvious" in premises liability claims by reversing two lower appellate court rulings.
Implementing a surveillance video retention policy can help businesses defend against premises liability claims.
Topics
- Property Liability
- Premises Liability
- Civil Litigation
- Negligence
- Damages Recovery
- Retail Liability
- Litigation Discovery
- Contractor Liability
- Insurance
- Residential Liability
- Appellate Law
- Fire Claims
- Construction Contractors
- Construction Law
- General Liability
- Personal Injury
- Commercial Liability
- Motor Vehicle Liability
- Water Loss Claims
- Commercial Real Estate
- Contracts
- insurance policy
- Fraud Activity
- Investigations
- Open & Obvious Doctrine
- Snow & Ice Claims
- Governmental Immunity
- Traumatic Brain Injury
- Marine Liability
- Maritime Law
- Open & Obvious
- Risk Management
- Artificial Intelligence
- Design Defect
- Industrial Liability
- Lost Earnings
- Business Risk Management
- Defamation
- Video Recording
- Liquor Liability
- Professional Liability
- Independent Medical Examinations (IME)
- Sports-liability
- Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR)
- Auto Liability
- Bankruptcy
- Intoxication
- Judicial Estoppel
- No Fault Liability
- Trucking Liability
- Wrongful Death
- Real Estate
- FDA Regulations
- Food Law
- Foodservice & Hospitality
- Regulatory Law
- Constructive Notice
Recent Updates
- What damages are recoverable in Michigan when property is negligently damaged or destroyed?
- Businesses can Bolster Lack of Notice Defense by Documenting Premises Inspections
- Avoiding the Premises Liability Trap of ‘Lost’ Evidence
- Appellate Court Faults Construction Company for Halting Work for Nonpayment in Breach of Agreed Upon Contract
- New Scope of Ohio Home Construction Suppliers Services Act Takes Effect
- The Skeptical Brain Injury – How Do You Prepare to Defend it?
- Post-Open and Obvious: What Property Owners Can Do to Protect Themselves
- Lessons in Civil Procedure and Civility from a Surprising Source: Barbie
- ‘Open and Obvious’ Falls, Restoring Focus on ‘Notice’ Defense in Michigan Premises Liability Cases
- Insurance Provider’s ‘Satisfaction’ Maketh the Proof of Loss
Comments


