JACQUELYN ROBBINS V VILLAGE CREST CONDOMINIUM ASSOCIATION (Dissenting Opinion)
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
STATE OF MICHIGAN COURT OF APPEALS JACQUELYN ROBBINS, UNPUBLISHED July 30, 2013 Plaintiff-Appellant, v No. 300842 Oakland Circuit Court LC No. 2009-106178-NO VILLAGE CREST CONDOMINIUM ASSOCIATION Defendant-Appellee. ON REMAND Before: SAAD, P.J., and STEPHENS and KRAUSE, JJ. SAAD, P.J. (dissenting). I. OPEN AND OBVIOUS Once again, I respectfully dissent. I disagree with the inverted logic used by the majority. The trial court and I say that under Michigan law, the winter conditions put plaintiff on notice of the potential for slippery conditions and accordingly, her claim is barred by the open and obvious doctrine. Moreover, plaintiff also failed to prove the necessary element of her claim that ice actually caused her fall because she could not testify what caused her fall and admitted that she never saw ice, before or after the fall. The majority takes these same weather conditions, but says that these elements did not put plaintiff on notice of the possibility of an icy surface, but nonetheless these very conditions suffice to prove that ice caused her fall despite her binding and dispositive admissions that she could not say what caused her to slip and fall. Therefore, I would affirm the trial court because the conditions were sufficiently open and obvious to preclude plaintiff s claim as is her failure to identify the cause of her fall. /s/ Henry William Saad
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
