Also known as: dangerous conditions · hazardous condition
Written by attorneys — see sources below.
A physical hazard on property that creates an unreasonable risk of harm to persons lawfully present. The condition triggers duties to repair or warn when a landlord retains control over the area or when the hazard violates habitability standards or statutes.
Daniel Diaz leased an exhibition hall from Drake Logistics for boxing events. The lease left lighting control with the landlord. A spectator fell through an unlit stairwell after the landlord ignored repair requests that violated the warranty of habitability. The landlord faces liability for the resulting injuries.
Dustin Donovan operated a metal shop next to Diana Delgado's residence. Unenclosed grinding equipment sent metallic particles onto her property at night. The resulting coating and noise substantially interfered with her use of the yard and sleep. Donovan's failure to install controls created the actionable condition.
Darrell Duncan rented an apartment in a building owned by Dawson Steel. The landlord kept exclusive control of the exterior staircase used by all tenants. A rotted tread collapsed under a guest because the landlord never inspected or repaired it. The retained control exposed the landlord to liability for the injury.
Diamond Manufacturing loaned a forklift to its subcontractor for loading operations. The equipment had a hidden brake defect that the supplier never checked or disclosed. An operator lost control and struck a bystander. The supplier's omission in discovering and reporting the condition supports liability.
Demetrius Douglas leased office space in a building owned by Dynamic Solutions. The landlord retained the roof and failed to fix a leak that soaked ceiling tiles above the tenant's conference room. A visitor slipped on the resulting puddle. Reasonable inspection would have revealed and allowed repair of the hazard.
Darlene Drake leased office space in a building owned by Dawson Properties. The landlord retained control of the lobby and failed to repair a loose handrail on the interior stairs used by all tenants. A client fell and was injured after the landlord ignored repeated complaints. The retained control exposed the landlord to liability for the resulting harm.
The Pennsylvania Abortion Control Act of 1982, as amended in 1988 and 1989, established several requirements governing the performance of abortions within the Commonwealth. The Act required a woman seeking an abortion to provide informed consent after receiving specific information from a physician or counselor at least twenty-four hours before the procedure. It mandated that a minor obtain the informed consent of one parent, subject to a judicial bypass option. It further required a married woman to sign a statement confirming that she had notified her husband of her planned abortion, unless certain exceptions applied. The Act also imposed reporting obligations on facilities providing abortion services and defined a medical emergency exception to the various requirements. Before any of these provisions took effect, the petitioners brought suit in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania. The petitioners were five abortion clinics and one physician representing himself as well as a class of physicians who provide abortion services. They sought declaratory and injunctive relief and challenged each provision as unconstitutional on its face. The District Court entered a preliminary injunction. After conducting a three-day bench trial, the District Court held all the provisions unconstitutional and entered a permanent injunction against their enforcement by Pennsylvania. The Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit affirmed in part and reversed in part. It adopted the District Court's factual findings and legal analysis except with respect to the spousal notification requirement. The Court of Appeals upheld the spousal notification requirement as constitutional and applied the undue burden standard in evaluating the provisions. The Supreme Court granted certiorari to consider the constitutionality of the challenged provisions of the Pennsylvania statute.
View caseA landlord is liable when the condition exists on property the landlord retains in its control and reasonable care would have discovered and corrected the risk. Liability also arises if the condition violates an implied warranty of habitability or a statutory duty and the landlord fails to repair it.
A trespasser who creates or activates a hazardous condition while on the land is liable for resulting physical harm to the possessor or household members. The rule applies even if the trespasser's conduct would not otherwise constitute negligence.
An unintentional invasion caused by a dangerous condition is actionable as private nuisance when the conduct is otherwise negligent or involves abnormally dangerous activities. The invasion must be a legal cause of interference with the plaintiff's use and enjoyment of land.
…threat to the life or health of a woman." Id. , at 701. It thus concluded that the exception encompassed each of the three dangerous conditions pointed to by petitioners. We observe that Pennsylvania's present definition of medical emergency is almost an exact copy of that State's definition at the time of this Court's ruling in…