NJ Law Review Update
Dear
Colleagues:
ISSUE: A purely residential condominium
association cannot be held liable for a pedestrian fall
on an icy sidewalk.
The New Jersey Supreme Court in the matter of Lucheiko v. Hoboken
extended the holding in Stewart v. 104 Wallace Street. Inc., 87 N.J.
146 (1981), and held that condominiums which are strictly residential in
nature will not be subject to sidewalk liability.
In Lucheiko, 551 Observer Highway, whose association is Skyline at
Hoboken Condominium Association Inc. ("Skyline"), is the site of a 104 unit
condominium complex. The master deed for the complex specifically states that
units can only be used as private residences, and there are no retail spaces
within the building. The plaintiff Richard Luchejko slipped on a sheet of black
ice on the sidewalk abutting 551 Observer Highway and broke his left leg. Mr.
Luchejko sued Skyline, CM3, the management company for the building, D&D, the
entity which provided snow cleaning services for the building, and the City of
Hoboken. The lower Court granted summary judgment to Skyline, CM3 and the City
of Hoboken. The Appellate Division affirmed.
The New Jersey Supreme Court stated that the Appellate Division properly
analyzed the facts and correctly concluded that the use of the condominium
complex was solely residential, and therefore under the Stewart line of
cases there could be no sidewalk liability for injuries to a pedestrian who
slipped on sidewalk abutting the property.
In the Stewart matter, the New Jersey Supreme Court noted that
residential property owners are at a different footing than commercial owners
who have the ability to spread the cost of risk through the commercial
activities of the owner, and therefore residential property owners should not be
subjected to sidewalk liability. In this matter, Skyline is a non-profit
corporation and its members are the present unit owners within the complex. This
is a strictly residential building, and there is no profit made from it. The
Supreme Court further opined that the development of the condominium form of
home ownership has done nothing to undermine the principals that support the
residential/commercial dichotomy recognized in Stewart. Therefore,
strictly residential condominiums should be treated the same as any other
residential home. Skyline can not be held liable for Mr. Luchejko's injuries
because it is strictly residential.
Further, the Court rejected the claim that CM3 should be found liable. CM3
was Skyline's agent, and therefore owed no duty to the plaintiff since Skyline
owed no such duty.
|
