Legal Opinion

Pierce v. City of Lansing

Michigan Court of Appeals

Decided February 10, 2005No. Docket No. 250124PublishedCited by 34 opinions

1Per curiam

Defendant city of Lansing1 appeals by right the trial court’s order denying its motion for summary disposition under MCR 2.116(C)(7) and (10). We affirm.

Plaintiffs commenced this action, alleging that plaintiff Sheryl Pierce was injured when she fell while entering an elevator at a city-owned parking structure. Plaintiff2 alleged that she fell when she failed to notice that the floor of the elevator was not even with the floor on which she was standing. According to a witness, the floor levels were uneven because the elevator was bouncing up and down when the doors opened.

Defendant moved for…

2Cases cited22 opinions

  1. Maiden v. RozwoodMichigan Supreme Court · 1999
  2. Quinto v. Cross and Peters Co.Michigan Supreme Court · 1996
  3. MacK v. City of DetroitMichigan Supreme Court · 2002
  4. Walsh v. TaylorMichigan Court of Appeals · 2004
  5. Wade v. Department of CorrectionsMichigan Supreme Court · 1992

17 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by34 opinions

  1. Willett v. Waterford Charter TownshipMichigan Court of Appeals · 2006
  2. McManamon v. Redford Charter TownshipMichigan Court of Appeals · 2006
  3. Kendricks v. RehfieldMichigan Court of Appeals · 2006
  4. Radu v. Herndon & Herndon Investigations, Inc.Michigan Court of Appeals · 2013
  5. Tellin v. Forsyth TownshipMichigan Court of Appeals · 2011

29 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API