Cyr v. VKB, LLC

Excerpt

The plaintiff sought to recover damages from the defendant property owners for injuries she sustained when she tripped on a public sidewalk that abutted the defendants' property. The plaintiff alleged that an approxi- mately one and one-half inch lip between two segments of the sidewalk constituted a defective condition in the sidewalk. Under the common law, a landowner whose property abuts a public sidewalk is under no duty to keep the sidewalk in front of the property in a reasonably safe condition, except when a municipality confers liability on the abutting landowner through a statute or ordinance, or where the defect was created by a positive act of the landowner. The defendants filed a motion for summary judgment, claiming, inter alia, that under the facts alleged by the plaintiff, they owed no duty to the plaintiff to maintain the sidewalk. The defendants claimed that the applicable city ordinance (§ 21-37) shifted only the duty of repairing an abutting sidewalk from the municipality to an abutting landowner but did not shift liability for injuries resulting from an unsafe condition on the sidewalk. The defendants further asserted that the positive act exception to the general rule absolving landowners of liability for defective sidewalks did not apply because they did not create the unsafe condition on the public sidewalk. The trial court granted the defendants' motion for summary judgment and rendered judgment thereon, from which the plaintiff appealed to this court. Held: 1. The trial court properly rendered summary judgment for the defendants as to counts one and two of the plaintiff's complaint, which alleged that the defendants violated § 21-37, the plaintiff's appellate counsel having conceded to this court that § 21-37 did not shift liability to the defendants and did not play any role in her appeal. 2. The trial court properly rendered summary judgment in favor of the defendants as to counts four and five of the complaint, which alleged that the defe