Plaintiff filed a complaint for negligence and premises liability after he fell through a skylight of a factory owned by the defendant. The circuit court granted the defendant’s motion for summary judgment by finding that the skylight was open and obvious and plaintiff appealed. The appellate court reversed and remanded, finding that under the four-part duty analysis, the defendant had a duty of reasonable care to warn of the danger of the unprotected skylight because plaintiff’s injury was foreseeable and the burden of guarding against plaintiff’s injuries and the consequences of placing that burden on the defendant was minimal. The appellate court also concluded that the distraction exception to the open and obvious doctrine applied under the facts of the case. (BIRKETT and MULLEN, concurring)
Illinois Appellate Court
Civil Court
Premises Liability