Premises liability; Buhalis v Trinity Continuing Care Servs; A premises possessor’s duty protect an invitee from an unreasonable risk of harm caused by a dangerous condition on the land; Lugo v Ameritech Corp, Inc; Open & obvious danger; Joyce v Rubin; Effect of lighting; Abke v Vandenberg; Knight v Gulf & W Props, Inc

Holding that genuine issues of material fact remained as to whether the hazardous condition on defendant-landlord’s (Kane Real Estate Investments 2) property was open and obvious, the court reversed the trial court’s grant of summary disposition for defendant, and remanded. Plaintiff-Thomas sued defendant for an injury she sustained as she was leaving her friend’s house. Her friend was renting the home from defendant. The trial court granted summary disposition for defendant. On appeal, the court disagreed with the trial court’s analysis. “Having considered the evidence regarding the darkness, the lack of adequate lighting, and the affect of both on the visibility of the 2-inch lip” between the rental property’s driveway and the sidewalk before and after plaintiff “stubbed her toe, we conclude that there is a genuine question of material fact with regard to whether the allegedly hazardous condition was open and obvious at the time of the incident.” It noted that defendant failed to provide any evidence refuting plaintiff’s testimony, including the testimony of its witnesses, which created “no factual question with regard to whether the condition would be visible upon casual inspection at night and whether the lighting conditions in the area were adequate to illuminate the hazard.” Further, although there was evidence to “support a finding that the lip would be visible upon causal inspection in the dark, it does not directly refute Thomas’s testimony that it was too dark to see the 2-inch lip before or after she stubbed her toe on it.” Thus, because the evidence must be viewed in the light most favorable to plaintiff, “the non-moving party, there is a genuine question of material fact with regard to the visibility level of the allegedly hazardous condition.”