arise when special aspects of a condition make even an open and obvious risk unreasonable.” Hoffner, 492 Mich at 461. “When such special aspects exist, a premises possessor must take reasonable steps to protect an invitee from that unreasonable risk of harm.” Id. Two instances that can constitute “special aspects” include “when the danger is unreasonably dangerous or when the danger is effectively unavoidable” because these conditions “give rise to a uniquely high likelihood of harm or severity of harm if the risk is not avoided.” Id. at 463 (quotation marks and citation omitted). “[W]hen a plaintiff demonstrates that a special aspect exists or that there is a genuine issue of material fact regarding whether a special aspect exists, tort recovery ma 389, 395-396; 740 NW2d 547 (2007) (<HOLDING>). Similarly, in this case, the ice- and
holding that icecovered steps did not present a high likelihood of harm or severity of harm holding that the risk of slipping and falling on ice is not sufficiently similar to those special aspects discussed in lugo to constitute a uniquely high likelihood or severity of harm and remove the condition from the open and obvious danger doctrine holding that a landowner may be liable for injuries to an independent contractors employee if the hazard ous condition was not open and obvious if the condition was not a necessary consequence of the construction and if the landowner maintained possession and control of the premises holding as a matter of law that natural condition present was open and obvious to all who would encounter it holding danger was so open and obvious to plaintiff that as a matter of law he knew or should have known of danger