704 N.W.2d 703
No. 127734.Supreme Court of Michigan.
October 19, 2005.
SC: 127734, COA: 249113, Wayne CC: 01-125094-NP.
On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the November 23, 2004 judgment of the Court of Appeals is considered, and it is GRANTED. Among the issues to be briefed, the parties are specifically directed to address the following: (1) whether the Court of Appeals erred in using a subjective rather than an objective standard in its analysis of the open and obvious doctrine, (2) whether the Court of Appeals erred in concluding that the product at issue was not a “simple” product, (3) whether the Court of Appeals erred in failing to recognize plaintiff as a sophisticated user as defined by MCL 600.2945(j), and (4) whether aspiration of this product is a foreseeable misuse, and whether the material risk of the misuse is or should be obvious to a reasonably prudent product user. Persons or groups interested in the issues presented in this case may move the Court for permission to file briefs amicus curiae.
204 N.W.2d 38 PEOPLE v. RAY Docket No. 12187.Michigan Court of Appeals. Decided September 27,…
562 N.W.2d 224 DETROIT EDISON COMPANY v PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION Docket Nos. 177054, 177055, 177062,…
376 N.W.2d 176 PEOPLE v BUTTS Docket No. 80186.Michigan Court of Appeals. Decided August 5,…
223 N.W.2d 652 PEOPLE v ZUNIGA Docket No. 17453.Michigan Court of Appeals. Decided October 21,…
308 N.W.2d 176 PEOPLE v SIDNEY SMITH Docket No. 50618.Michigan Court of Appeals. Decided March…
545 N.W.2d 18 PEOPLE v McELHANEY Docket No. 162330.Michigan Court of Appeals.Submitted November 15, 1995,…