SPRING IS UPON US, BUT ITS STILL SNOWING IN THE NORTH COUNTRY
It felt as if it was snowing every day here in Lake Placid this winter. Spring is almost here and it is still snowing!
Although the snow is pretty to look at it (and fun to play in), a slip and fall on snow or ice can cause serious injuries. You may wonder who can be held liable in such a situation.
Any negligence case begins with an analysis as to whether an alleged tortfeasor owes a duty to the injured party. The scope of one’s duty is a question of law for the Court to determine. Generally, and as a matter of public policy, a person or entity cannot be held liable to a third party to which they have no contractual obligation.
The issue of whether a snow removal contractor hired by a property owner can be held liable to an injured plaintiff was addressed by the Court of Appeals in Espinal v. Melville Snow Contractors, Inc. in 2002, and this case remains top of mind in the winter months here in the North Country.
In Espinal, the snow removal contractor’s obligations pursuant to the contract with the property owner was to clear snow that exceeded three inches by truck and plow on roadways, parking areas, entrances and exits. The contractor would spread a mixture of salt and sand at certain areas on the property as well. During late evening and early morning hours, the contractor was to provide a one-time plowing per snowfall and only after accumulations had ceased. If there was a plowable accumulation by 4 AM and it was still snowing, the contractor was to provide a limited plowing to get the property opened before 9 AM but then only plow a second time during the day after the accumulations had ended.
Because this contract as written limited the contractor’s obligation to a snow accumulation that exceeded three inches and only after a storm had ended, the Court of Appeals held this was not a comprehensive and exclusive obligation relieving the property owner of the duty to maintain the premises safely. The Court further held that by merely plowing the snow, a contractor could not be said to have created or exacerbated a dangerous condition. Hence, the Court of Appeals held that the snow removal contractor owed no duty of care to the injured plaintiff that fell on the property.
Ultimately whether a duty will exist will depend on the specific contract language and the specific facts surrounding any slip and fall. If you or someone you know has been injured in a slip and fall on ice or snow due to someone else’s negligence, please do not hesitate to contact the Flink Maswick Law team.
