Premises Liability

No Duty Of Care While Freezing Rain Still In The Air (PA)

A Pennsylvania trial court granted summary judgment in a premises liability case where the plaintiff slipped and fell during an ongoing storm of rain and freezing rain, thereby reaffirming that a property owner has no obligation to remove all of the ice from its premises while the icy precipitation continued to fall.  In  Nunez v. Johnson & Johnson, Henry Nunez was employed by Allied...Read More

On The Fence: Jury To Decide Whether A Makeshift Fence Is An Open And Obvious Or Dangerous Condition (NY)

It is well settled in New York that while an owner of real property has a duty to maintain a reasonably safe premises, it has no duty to protect or warn against open and obvious conditions that are not inherently dangerous. Whether a condition is dangerous or defective is generally an issue of fact for the jury. In Crowley v. 585 Route 25A Holding LLC., Suffolk County Supreme Court addressed...Read More

Lack of Ownership May Not be Sufficient to Defeat Summary Judgment on Premises Claim (NY)

When a plaintiff slips and falls on property owned by a town, the town may not be the party on the hook. Generally, if a defendant is able to sufficiently establish that it did not occupy, or control the location where the accident occurred, it will not be held liable for the alleged injuries. In certain circumstances they must also establish they did not make special use of the premise to...Read More

NY Appellate Court Affirms “Reasonably Safe” Requirement of Property Owner in Dismissal of Premises Case

In Shuttleworth v. Saint Margaret’s R.C. Church in Middle Village, 2022 NY Slip Op 05730, (2nd Dept. 2022), plaintiff slipped and fell on a metal drainage grating while it was raining. The defendant property owner moved for summary judgment arguing that the condition was not defective at the time of the incident. The trial court denied defendant’s motion but the Second Department...Read More

Routine Security Sweeps Can Create An Issue Of Fact In Premises Liability Cases (NY)

In New York, landowners and business owners have a duty to maintain their properties in a reasonably safe condition. In seeking summary judgment in a premises liability case, they have the initial burden of establishing that they did not create or have actual or constructive notice of a dangerous condition on the premises. In Andrews v. JCP Groceries, Inc., the Appellate Division, Fourth...Read More

Surveillance Footage Key To Establishing Open And Obvious Defense (NY)

New York courts generally hold that a landowner has no duty to warn of open and obvious dangers. In Lebron v. City of New York, the Appellate Division, Second Department recently addressed whether an inspection pit that plaintiff fell into on the defendants’ property was an open and obvious, and not inherently, dangerous. The defendants introduced surveillance of the accident as evidence of...Read More

No More Happy Meals – Court Finds Affirmative Duty For Franchise Restaurant To Protect Invitees From Third-Party Harm

In a recent presidential opinion by the Pennsylvania Superior Court in Massaro v. McDonald’s Corp., 2022 Pa. Super. Lexis 320, 2022 WL 3036753 (Aug. 2, 2022), the court provided clarity on the affirmative duty of a property owner to protect a business invitee from intentional harmful acts of a third party. In Massaro, plaintiff, Thomas Massaro (“Plaintiff”) was assaulted by an allegedly...Read More

Open And Obvious Danger Leaves Plaintiff In the Pit (NY)

In Lebron v. City of New York, NY Slip Op 04960 (2nd Dept. 2022), a claim was filed by plaintiff when he fell into an inspection pit for vehicles at the garage facility operated by the New York City Taxi & Limousine Commission. Defendants moved for summary judgment arguing that the condition was an open and obvious defect and it did not require any duty by the property owner to warn the...Read More

Pennsylvania Landowners Also Have a Duty to Protect Invitees from Intentional Harm

In Massaro v. McDonalds Corporation, the Pennsylvania Superior Court found that landowners had an affirmative duty to protect invitees from intentional harmful acts of third parties. On September 21, 2018, the plaintiff, Thomas Massaro, went to a McDonald’s restaurant in Philadelphia to tutor a student. While tutoring the student, a man named Bryant Gordon entered the store and began berating...Read More

Is Routine Cleaning Protected Under the Labor Law

The Labor Law protects a plaintiff when he or she is engaged in the erection, demolition, repairing, altering, painting, cleaning, or pointing of a building or structure. But what defines cleaning? In the case of Healy v. EST Downtown, LLC, 191 A.D.3d 1274 (4th Dep’t 2021), plaintiff was employed as a maintenance and repair technician by a certain building property manager. Plaintiff’s regular...Read More