Homeowner injured in common area of a community was to be treated as licensee, not invitee.

The plaintiff was injured after falling on branches on steps in a common area leading to her townhouse at a mixed townhome/single-family home community known as Indian King. The trial court found for the defendant, and the plaintiff appealed, alleging, in part, that the trial court erred in charging the jury that the appellant-plaintiff was a licensee, not an invitee.

The appellant argued that the defendant was in the business of “property manager” and that by paying “maintenance fees” for common area maintenance, she should be regarded as an invitee. The court disagreed and affirmed the holding of the trial court, making a distinction between using a common area with permission, as opposed to by invitation, and noting that, because the appellant used the area with permission, as opposed to under circumstances where the appellee desired for the appellant to enter the land, the appellant was not owed the heightened duty that an invitee would be owed as opposed to a mere licensee.

This holding shows a hesitance to permit similarly situated homeowners, even when using a common area maintained by another, to be treated as invitees.

_{Case Law Alerts, 3rd Quarter, July 2020 is prepared by Marshall Dennehey Warner Coleman & Goggin to provide information on recent developments of interest to our readers. This publication is not intended to provide legal advice for a specific situation or to create an attorney-client relationship. Copyright © 2020 Marshall Dennehey Warner Coleman & Goggin, all rights reserved. This article may not be reprinted without the express written permission of our firm.}