Narrative Opinion Summary
In Hill v. Husky Briquetting, Inc., the Supreme Court of Michigan granted the application for leave to appeal and affirmed the decision of the Court of Appeals. The ruling emphasized that while customary usage and practice within an industry are relevant in determining the applicable standard, such usage cannot solely define that standard. The Court explicitly stated that prior decisions, specifically Cheli v. Cudahy Brothers Co. and Barton v. Myers, which suggested otherwise, would no longer be followed. The document also notes that a syllabus summarizing the case is provided for convenience but is not part of the Court's opinion.
Legal Issues Addressed
Industry Custom and Standard of Caresubscribe to see similar legal issues
Application: The Court determined that industry customs and practices are relevant but not definitive in establishing the standard of care.
Reasoning: The ruling emphasized that while customary usage and practice within an industry are relevant in determining the applicable standard, such usage cannot solely define that standard.
Overruling of Precedentsubscribe to see similar legal issues
Application: The Court decided not to follow previous decisions that allowed industry customs to solely define the standard of care.
Reasoning: The Court explicitly stated that prior decisions, specifically Cheli v. Cudahy Brothers Co. and Barton v. Myers, which suggested otherwise, would no longer be followed.