Vacant two-family home with ability to generate income not considered commercial property in sidewalk liability case.

The plaintiff fell and injured herself in front of a vacant two-family property, whose owners lived across the street, due to a sidewalk defect. The plaintiff argued the vacant home was a commercial property because, although vacant, it had an ability to generate income for its owners, which would, in turn, create a duty of care to maintain the abutting sidewalk in a reasonably safe condition. The court disagreed, finding the property was residential rather than commercial because it had not been habited in seven years and there was no evidence it was fit for rental. Accordingly, the court did not extent a duty of care to maintain the abutting sidewalk to the owners who lived across the street. This case clarifies a caveat of sidewalk liability law.

Case Law Alerts, 1st Quarter, January 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.