Tenant Loses When Trip-And-Fall Is Caused By An Obvious Condition And Tenant Neglect.
.jpg)
The importance of clear and unambiguous lease terms and properly documenting a pre-lease property inspection was recently demonstrated in Greely v. OAG Properties, LLC. A year after taking possession of his apartment, a tenant tripped over a two inch tall sapling stump in his backyard and fell and struck his head. The tenant sued his landlord claiming that the stump was an “unreasonably dangerous condition” (pdf) and that the concrete slab he hit also presented a hazardous condition.
The landlord filed a motion for summary judgment on the basis that the stump was an open and obvious condition (pdf) and attached a copy of property inspection report and the lease. According to the property inspection report, the tenant had inspected the property, including the yard, and accepted the condition of the property (pdf). The lease also provided, in relevant part, that the tenant was solely responsible for keeping the premises in “good and sanitary condition and repair” (pdf) and that the lessee would indemnify and defend the lessor from any claims for damage or injury arising from the condition of the property. In further support of the motion, the landlord attached an affidavit from its property manager in which he stated that he had personally pruned the saplings and cleared the backyard of all leaves and debris a month before the lease was signed. In addition, the property manager stated that he sprayed a weed killer in the area around the stumps that killed all of the groundcover in the area thereby making the stumps obvious.
The tenant opposed the motion for summary judgment, arguing that the landlord had promised to clean the yard and that he didn’t know that the stump was there because it was hidden by leaves. The trial court granted summary judgment in favor of the landlord and the tenant appealed.
In affirming the trial court’s ruling, the Louisiana Second Circuit Court of Appeal specifically noted that, according to Louisiana law, a landlord will not be liable for an injury caused by a condition that should have been observed by a reasonably prudent person or was just as obvious to a visitor as it was to the landlord. Moreover, the court observed that societal expectations do not include an expectation that residential yards be kept in perfect condition or include lawns that are “table top” smooth. The appellate court also found no reason to avoid the contractual shifting of liability to the tenant for the injury caused by the condition of the property. The appellate court, however, ultimately affirmed the trial court’s ruling on the simple finding that the landlord’s documents established that the tenant had inspected the property and accepted its condition more than a year before the accident. In the court’s opinion, the allegedly dangerous condition was either known or knowable to the tenant in the year before the accident. Moreover, since the tenant was responsible for maintaining the property and the stumps were allegedly covered by leaves at the time of the accident, the court found that the accident was attributable to the tenant’s own negligence and failure to properly maintain the premises.
Take-Away: While the landlord might have prevailed simply on the basis of the language in its lease that shifted responsibility to the tenant, this case demonstrates the value of performing and properly documenting pre-lease inspections and in using clear and unambiguous lease forms that include such things as tenant acknowledgements regarding the condition of the property.
