(908)402-4770In a recent decision titled Padilla v. Young, the New Jersey Supreme Court expanded commercial property owners’ liability for slip and fall injuries on sidewalks abutting vacant land.
In September 2019, Alejandra Padilla was walking on the sidewalk abutting the vacant commercial property owned by Young Il An and Myo Soon An. She allegedly fell because of defects on the sidewalk abutting the vacant lot owned by the defendants.
The defendants had purchased the lot (and an adjoining lot) in 1992. They intended to build a commercial building on the adjoining lots but never felt the business climate was right. They did not have insurance coverage for either of the lots, which were zoned for commercial business usage.
The defendants successfully moved for summary judgment. The trial judge held that the liability imposed on commercial property owners to reasonably maintain abutting sidewalks does not apply to sidewalks abutting vacant lots, relying on Abraham v. Gupta, 281 N.J. Super. 81 (App. Div. 1995). The judge determined the defendants did not have a duty to maintain the sidewalk because it abutted a vacant lot that was not generating any income (emphasis added), citing Stewart v. 104 Wallace Street, Inc., 87 N.J. 146 (1981).
Furthermore, the trial court rejected the plaintiffs’ contention that summary judgment was improper because a Camden municipal ordinance required the defendants to maintain the lots’ abutting sidewalk. The judge explained municipal ordinances create neither a private right of action nor a separate common law duty.
The Appellate Division affirmed.
The Evolution of Commercial Owners’ Liability
In a 4-3 decision, the Supreme Court went into a fairly detailed background discussion of the evolution of common and civil law on attaching liability to commercial property owners for injuries sustained by victims on defective abutting sidewalks and roads.
At common law, and, until relatively recently in civil law, commercial landowners had no responsibility for injuries the actions of the commercial owner caused to pedestrians on abutting sidewalks unless the landowner was negligent in building or repairing the walkways. It was the responsibility of the “parish” (the local governing body) to maintain the sidewalks and roads.
However, recognizing that commercial owners often attract visitors to their property to the benefit of the business, courts in New Jersey, and across the nation, imposed a duty of care towards the visitors they attracted to their business. In Stewart, the Court characterized the previous “no liability” rule as “anachronistic” and as “producing] harsh and unfair results,” 87 N.J. at 150.
In Stewart, the Court held that “commercial landowners are responsible for maintaining in reasonably good condition the sidewalks abutting their property and are liable to pedestrians injured as a result of their negligent failure to do so,” iI. at 149, 157.
The Court concluded that placing this duty on commercial property owners was fair because they have a substantial interest in abutting sidewalks, which provide “easy access to [and from] their premises and increase the value of their property,” and they are in “an ideal position to inspect sidewalks and to take prompt action to cure defects.” Id. at 151-52, 158 (the Court limited imposing the duty to maintain abutting sidewalks to commercial — not residential — properties. Id. at 159).
The Court further extended commercial landowners’ duty of care in Gray v. Caldwell Wood Products, Inc., 425 N.J. Super. 496 (App. Div. 2012). Gray likewise focused on income potential and found that the owner of a then-vacant commercial building — which the owner marketed for sale, insured, and permitted prospective buyers to inspect — owed a duty to a pedestrian injured on the sidewalk. 425 N.J. Super. 496, 498, 501 (App. Div. 2012).
In short, the Court in Padilla decided that whether a duty exists is ultimately a question of fairness. That guiding principle led the Court to impose a duty of care on all owners of vacant commercial lots to maintain the abutting sidewalks in reasonably good condition. Purchasing a vacant commercial lot is a business decision that embraces the attendant costs and burdens of conducting business. The Court reasoned that one of those costs includes maintaining the abutting sidewalks so that they are in a reasonably safe condition for innocent pedestrians.
To the majority of the Court, Abraham and Gray show the difficulty of employing a case-by-case, commercial-property-by-commercial-property approach to determining when a duty is owed. In Padilla, it did not matter that there is no structure or active business being conducted on the property in question. The Court felt the sidewalk liability distinction should be between commercial and residential properties, not among certain types of commercial properties, commercial properties with buildings, or commercial properties with active, potentially profitable entities on them.
The Court felt the bright-line rule articulated by Padilla — that all commercial property owners owe a duty to maintain abutting sidewalks in reasonably good condition — will ensure fairness, consistency, and predictability in the future. The Court stated that to the extent Abraham conflicts with the Padilla decision, it is overruled.
As the Court has done in other cases reviewing this issue, it implored the Legislature to address the issue of commercial sidewalk liability by statute (the Court confirmed the trial judge’s earlier ruling that the fact that Camden’s municipal code required landowners to maintain their abutting sidewalks did not confer a private right of action or common law duty).
New Jersey Slip and Fall Attorneys Get Results for Their Injured Clients
Below are some recent cases in which Schiller, Pittenger & Galvin, P.C.’s attorneys secured recoveries for clients injured during slip and falls:
- January 23, 2020 – $750,000 settlement for a slip and fall accident
- February 7, 2019 – $180,000 settlement for a slip and fall
If you have been injured in a slip and fall or fall down accident on another’s property, you may be entitled to damages for bodily injury, pain, and suffering, disability, loss of enjoyment of life, lost wages, mental distress, and unpaid medical bills.
If a slip and fall accident leaves you injured, call Schiller, Pittenger & Galvin, P.C., at 908-402-4770 or contact us online for a free consultation.