 |
 |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Personal Injury Lawyers in your area.
|
|
|
|
|
Harless v. Geyer12/31/1992
e by reason of use, construction, disaster damage, vandalism, quality of materials, inadequate maintenance, dilapidation, or abandonment.
We find nothing in the record to indicate that the stairway had been damaged or fallen into structural disrepair so as to trigger any duty for defendant to undertake repairs pursuant to Denver Building Code §§ 106 & 107.
We also reject plaintiff's contention that the trial court erred in granting summary judgment on her negligence claim.
In order to recover on her negligence claim, plaintiff was required to demonstrate the existence of a legal duty owed to her by the defendant. See Connes v. Molalla Transport System, Inc., 831 P.2d 1316 (Colo. 1992). However, a landlord owes no duty to a tenant for injuries caused by patent defects that were plainly visible to the tenant prior to the tenant's occupancy under the lease. Davis v. Marr, 160 Colo. 27, 413 P.2d 707 (1966).
Here, it was undisputed that plaintiff had an opportunity to inspect the premises and was aware of the absence of a handrail, as well as any other defect which plaintiff now attempts to allege. Accordingly, the trial court did not err in concluding that defendant owed no duty of care to plaintiff for such conditions as existed in this case.
The judgment is affirmed.
JUDGE JONES and JUDGE MARQUEZ concur.
Disposition
JUDGMENT AFFIRMED
|