Opinion
SC: 158563 COA: 336220
11-15-2019
Order
On November 7, 2019, the Court heard oral argument on the application for leave to appeal the September 6, 2018 judgment of the Court of Appeals. On order of the Court, the application is again considered and, pursuant to MCR 7.305(H)(1), in lieu of granting leave to appeal, we REVERSE the judgment of the Court of Appeals. As noted by Judge METER in his dissent, when viewed in a light most favorable to the plaintiff, the "plaintiff presented sufficient evidence that the defective road was a proximate cause of" the injuries in this case. Menard v. Imig , unpublished per curiam opinion of the Court of Appeals, issued September 6, 2018 (Docket No. 336220), 2018 WL 4259374 ( METER , J., dissenting), p. 1. Specifically, there is evidence that the defective road was more than the "condition or occasion affording opportunity for the other event to produce the injury"; rather, it "put in motion the agency by which the injuries [were] inflicted ...." Singerman v. Muni. Serv. Bureau, Inc. , 455 Mich. 135, 145, 565 N.W.2d 383 (1997) (quotation marks and citation omitted). We REMAND this case to the Court of Appeals for consideration of the issues raised by the defendants but not addressed by that court during its initial review of this case.