 |
 |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Personal Injury Lawyers in your area.
|
|
|
|
|
Pavuk v. Rogers8/17/2001
Appeal from the District Court of Teton County The Honorable D. Terry Rogers, Judge
[ ] Kurt Pavuk (appellant), a social guest of the tenant, was injured when he fell down a stairway on premises leased from Ila Rogers and Mary Ann Shaffer (appellees). In the ensuing personal injury action, the district court granted summary judgment to appellees, citing common law landlord immunity. Appellant asks this Court to reject that common law immunity, thereby recognizing recent legislative intent to the contrary. Finding that summary judgment in favor of appellees was proper under the circumstances of this case, we affirm.
ISSUES
[ ] The only issue raised by appellant is whether this Court should abandon its adherence to the common law doctrine of landlord immunity for injuries to a tenant or third-party guest of the tenant.
FACTS
[ ] In December, 1996, appellant suffered severe injuries, resulting in paraplegia, when he fell down the outside back stairs of a townhouse owned by appellees and rented to appellant's acquaintance. Appellant brought the instant civil action on January 18, 2000, alleging that appellees maintained the premises in a dangerous condition. The district court granted summary judgment to appellees, finding (1) there were no issues of ma terial fact; (2) appellees had not retained control over the premises; (3) there were no latent defects; and (4) appellees were protected by common law landlord immunity from negligence claims brought by a social guest of their tenant.
STANDARD OF REVIEW
[ ] Summary judgment motions are determined under the following language from W.R.C.P. 56(c):
The judgment sought shall be rendered forthwith if the pleadings, depositions, answers to interrogatories, and admissions on file, together with the affidavits, if any, show that there is no genuine issue as to any material fact and that the moving party is entitled to a judgment as a matter of law.
Since the parties have not suggested any disagreement as to the material facts in this case, we "have only to determine whether the district court properly granted summary judgment as a matter of law." Cooper v. Town of Pinedale, 1 P.3d 1197, 1200 (Wyo. 2000).
DISCUSSION
[ ] In recent years, this Court has had several occasions to reiterate Wyoming's long-standing adherence to the common law doctrine of landlord immunity. Under that doctrine, landlords have no duty to tenants or to tenants' guests for the condition of the premises, with the following exceptions:
1. Undisclosed conditions known to lessor and unknown to the lessee which were hidden or latently dangerous and caused an injury. * * *
2. The premises were leased for public use and a member of the public was injured.
3. Part of the premises was retained under the lessor's control, but was open to the use of the lessee. * * *
4. Lessor had contracted to repair the premises. * * *
5. Negligence by lessor in making repairs. Taylor v. Schukei Family Trust ex rel. Schukei, 996 P.2d 13, 16 (Wyo. 2000). See also Flores v. Simmons, 999 P.2d 1310, 1312-13 (Wyo. 2000); Selby v. Conquistador Apartments, Ltd., 990 P.2d 491, 496 (Wyo. 1999); and Roberts v. Klinkosh, 986 P.2d 153, 156 (Wyo. 1999).
[ ] While continuing to apply the common law rule, this Court has been cognizant of the fact that many states have abrogated landlord immunity in the face of changing times. Finding the social policies involved in such a decision to be a matter for the legislature, we declined judicially to follow suit. Ortega v. Flaim, 902 P.2d 199, 202-04 (Wyo. 1995). I
Page 1 2 Wyoming Personal Injury Attorneys
Personal Injury Lawyers
|
| |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Personal Injury Lawyers in your area.
|
|