Shareef El-Jamaly v. Kirco Manix Construction LLC

Summary

The Michigan Supreme Court held that plaintiff presented sufficient evidence to avoid summary disposition on his claims against both the general contractor and the electric utility. As to the general contractor, factual disputes existed concerning each contested aspect of the common work area doctrine, including the reasonableness of safety measures, the number of workers exposed, and whether the area was common. As to the utility, factual disputes about the height and maintenance of the power lines and the foreseeability of contact with conductive equipment precluded a definitive ruling that no duty existed.