The firm’s New Jersey office successfully argued a Summary Judgment Motion in Burlington County. The Court found that there was no genuine issue as to any material fact and that plaintiff failed to establish a claim of negligence against our client.
This action stemmed from a slip-and-fall which occurred on the premises of a condominium building, where Plaintiff resided. After cleaning snow off of the passenger side of her car, Plaintiff attempted to walk around her car from the passenger side to the driver’s side. She was allegedly unable to do so due to snow build up. Plaintiff proceeded to walk to the sidewalk abutting the parking lot, where she allegedly slipped-and-fell. Plaintiff commenced this action against a number of defendants including our client, the condominium’s property manager.
Plaintiff’s opposition to our Summary Judgment motion extensively cited to the duty of care owed by a landowner to third persons. However, the Court found that our client most certainly is not a landowner. Therefore the standards set forth regarding the duty of care owed by a landowner were inapplicable for purposes of our motion.
Beth Wallach argued that the mere happening of an accident does not impose liability on our client. She further argued that all of the evidence on the record confirmed that our client had no independent authority or decision making ability to contact the landscaping company responsible for snow removal and calcium application. Using our client and co-defendant’s depositions, Beth was able to successfully demonstrate that our client was only permitted to contact the landscaping company when he was explicitly instructed to do so by the condominium association.
The Court granted our Summary Judgment Motion, finding that our client did not owe a duty to the Plaintiff to keep the common element clear of snow and ice, and there exists no genuine issue of material fact in regards to our client’s apparent authority to call the landscaping company for snow and ice removal services.