Slip & fall on ice; Premises liability; Negligence; Benton v. Dart Props., Inc.; Duty; Sanders v. Perfecting Church; Hoffner v. Lanctoe; Whether plaintiff was an invitee or licensee; Pippin v. Atallah; Open & obvious danger; Lugo v. Ameritech Corp., Inc.; Principle that a snow-covered surface, by its very nature, presents an open & obvious danger because of the high probability that it may be slippery; Ververis v. Hartfield Lanes (On Remand); “Special aspects”; Whether the condition was effectively unavoidable; Lymon v. Freedland; Bullard v. Oakwood Annapolis Hosp.; Effect of defendant’s notice of the condition

The court held that the trial court did not err by granting summary disposition for defendant because the ice on which plaintiff fell was open and obvious and not effectively unavoidable. Plaintiff sued defendant for injuries she sustained when she slipped and fell on ice in defendant’s driveway. The trial court dismissed her claim, finding there was no genuine issue of material fact that the hazard presented by the snowy condition of the driveway was open and obvious and not effectively unavoidable. On appeal, the court found there was “no genuine issue of material fact that the hazardous risk was open and obvious because a reasonably prudent person would have observed the snowy and icy conditions of the driveway and foreseen the accompanying danger of slipping.” Simply because she “did not see a particular patch of ice or snow does not negate the application of the open-and-obvious doctrine.” Further, the danger “was not effectively unavoidable.” Finally, given that “the hazardous condition was open and obvious (without any special aspects making it nonetheless unreasonable), [defendant] had no duty to remedy the condition and it was irrelevant whether she knew of” it. Affirmed.