Opinion
No. 134936.
January 24, 2008.
Court of Appeals No. 276154.
Summary Dispositions January 24, 2008.
Pursuant to MCR 7.302(G)(1), in lieu of granting leave to appeal, we reverse the decision of the Macomb Circuit Court denying summary disposition to the defendants on the ground that the defendants' knowledge of an ice hazard rendered the open and obvious doctrine inapplicable. Because the plaintiff was a licensee, the defendants only had a duty to warn the plaintiff of hidden dangers known to the defendants. Stitt v Holland Abundant Life, 462 Mich 591, 596 (2000). The fact that the danger was known to the defendants does not mean that the danger was hidden to the plaintiff. We remand this case to the Macomb Circuit Court for further consideration of the defendants' motion for summary disposition to determine whether the icy condition that allegedly caused the plaintiffs injury was open and obvious. Lugo v Ameritech Corp, Inc, 464 Mich 512 (2001). We do not retain jurisdiction.