Posts from October 2014.
The need to access one’s mailbox may constitute an “extenuating circumstance” such that Michigan’s open and obvious danger doctrine will not bar potential recovery.
Comments
Subscribe
RSSTopics
- Premises Liability
- Contractor Liability
- Civil Litigation
- Construction Contractors
- Construction Law
- Property Liability
- Litigation Discovery
- Contracts
- Insurance
- Appellate Law
- Residential Liability
- Fire Claims
- General Liability
- Traumatic Brain Injury
- Motor Vehicle Liability
- Commercial Liability
- Retail Liability
- Water Loss Claims
- insurance policy
- Fraud Activity
- Investigations
- Governmental Immunity
- Commercial Real Estate
- Open & Obvious Doctrine
- Snow & Ice Claims
- Marine Liability
- Maritime Law
- Artificial Intelligence
- Design Defect
- Lost Earnings
- Industrial Liability
- Video Recording
- Defamation
- Open & Obvious
- Risk Management
- Liquor Liability
- Business Risk Management
- Professional Liability
- Negligence
- Independent Medical Examinations (IME)
- Sports-liability
- Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR)
- Auto Liability
- Bankruptcy
- Intoxication
- Judicial Estoppel
- No Fault Liability
- Trucking Liability
- Wrongful Death
- Real Estate
- FDA Regulations
- Food Law
- Foodservice & Hospitality
- Regulatory Law
- Constructive Notice
Recent Updates
- Appellate Court Faults Construction Company for Halting Work for Nonpayment in Breach of Agreed Upon Contract
- New Scope of Ohio Home Construction Suppliers Services Act Takes Effect
- The Skeptical Brain Injury – How Do You Prepare to Defend it?
- Post-Open and Obvious: What Property Owners Can Do to Protect Themselves
- Lessons in Civil Procedure and Civility from a Surprising Source: Barbie
- ‘Open and Obvious’ Falls, Restoring Focus on ‘Notice’ Defense in Michigan Premises Liability Cases
- Insurance Provider’s ‘Satisfaction’ Maketh the Proof of Loss
- The High Seas and High Risks of Lithium Batteries
- Uniform Trade Practices Act Requires Timely Payment of Property Claims
- Michigan Supreme Court Eliminates 'Open and Obvious' Defense in Premises Liability Cases