Case Name: Keith SMITH, Plaintiff-Appellee/Cross-Appellant, v. CITY OF DETROIT, Defendant/Cross-Plaintiff, and Merlo Construction Company, Inc., Defendant/Cross-Defendant-Appellant/Cross-Appellee, and Rauhorn Electric, Inc., Defendant/Cross-Defendant/ Cross-Plaintiff, and Parsons Brinckerhoff Michigan, Inc., and Poco, Inc., Defendants/Cross-Defendants.
Court: Michigan Supreme Court
Jurisdiction: Michigan
Decision Date: 2019-06-14
Citations: 928 N.W.2d 219
Docket Number: SC: 158300; COA: 337708
Parties: Keith SMITH, Plaintiff-Appellee/Cross-Appellant,
v.
CITY OF DETROIT, Defendant/Cross-Plaintiff,
and
Merlo Construction Company, Inc., Defendant/Cross-Defendant-Appellant/Cross-Appellee,
and
Rauhorn Electric, Inc., Defendant/Cross-Defendant/ Cross-Plaintiff,
and
Parsons Brinckerhoff Michigan, Inc., and Poco, Inc., Defendants/Cross-Defendants.
Judges: 
Reporter: North Western Reporter 2d
Volume: 928
Pages: 219–220

Head Matter:
Keith SMITH, Plaintiff-Appellee/Cross-Appellant,
v.
CITY OF DETROIT, Defendant/Cross-Plaintiff,
and
Merlo Construction Company, Inc., Defendant/Cross-Defendant-Appellant/Cross-Appellee,
and
Rauhorn Electric, Inc., Defendant/Cross-Defendant/ Cross-Plaintiff,
and
Parsons Brinckerhoff Michigan, Inc., and Poco, Inc., Defendants/Cross-Defendants.
SC: 158300
COA: 337708
Supreme Court of Michigan.
June 14, 2019
Order

Opinion:
On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the July 24, 2018 judgment of the Court of Appeals and the application for leave to appeal as cross-appellant are considered. We direct the Clerk to schedule oral argument on the application for leave to appeal as cross-appellant. MCR 7.305(H)(1).
The plaintiff cross-appellant shall file a supplemental brief within 42 days of the date of this order addressing whether the defendant cross-appellee maintained possession and control over the sidewalk such that plaintiff's claim sounded in premises liability rather than ordinary negligence. Compare Orel v. Uni-Rak Sales Co. Inc. , 454 Mich. 564, 563 N.W.2d 241 (1997), and Finazzo v. Fire Equip. Co. , 323 Mich. App. 620, 918 N.W.2d 200 (2018), with Fraim v. City Sewer of Flint , 474 Mich. 1101, 711 N.W.2d 83 (2006). In addition to the brief, the plaintiff shall electronically file an appendix conforming to MCR 7.312(D)(2). In the brief, citations to the record must provide the appendix page numbers as required by MCR 7.312(B)(1). The defendant shall file a supplemental brief within 21 days of being served with the plaintiff's brief. The defendant shall also electronically file an appendix, or in the alternative, stipulate to the use of the appendix filed by the plaintiff. A reply, if any, must be filed by the plaintiff within 14 days of being served with the defendant's brief. The parties should not submit mere restatements of their application papers.
The Michigan Association for Justice, Michigan Defense Trial Counsel, Inc., and the Negligence Section of the State Bar of Michigan are invited to file briefs amicus curiae. Other persons or groups interested in the determination of the issue presented in this case may move the Court for permission to file briefs amicus curiae.
The application for leave to appeal remains pending.