A Slippery Proposition: a Business or Land Owner’s Liability for a Visitor’s Slip and Fall on Snow or Ice.

This week life will begin to return to normal for business owners who have felt a real hit because of the blizzards. If you are a business owner who expects visitors, including customers and clients, or a landlord or commercial property owner whose property will receive visitors, you should know the extent of your obligations lie to clear snow and ice from a visitor’s path (including the parking lot).

Maryland law offers some guidance on an owner’s snow and ice removal obligations, although the line between liability and no liability is sometimes as clear as a salt covered windshield.

Maryland courts have adopted a 3-part “test” for analyzing whether a business or commercial landowner is liable to its business “invitees” – which what courts call customers, clients, and others who may walk onto your commercial property. The following three factors, if met, will subject the business or landowner liable for a business invitee’s slip and fall injury:

1. The owner knows (or by the exercise of reasonable care could discovery) the slippery condition that caused the fall;
2. The owner should expect that invitees will not discovery the danger, or will fail to protect themselves against it; and
3. The owner fails to take measures to eliminate the unsafe condition or does not warn its invitees that the unsafe condition exists.

Of course, it is very unlikely that factor #2 could be met the week or two after the history-making blizzards hit the area, but that may not be true for very long. Maryland’s courts, like many state courts, often take into consideration the length of time that had passed between the date that snow has fallen and the date of the invitee’s accident. For example, in one case the Court held that a storeowner was not liable for a slip and fall the morning after a snowfall that had ended at noon the day before. In another case, however, a supermarket was found liable for a slip and fall on ice and snow that existed five days after a snowfall. The court’s ultimate determination is whether the owner removed the snow and ice within a “reasonable” amount of time after the storm.

Even if snow is removed promptly, ice from melting piles can cause slippery conditions for days or weeks after. When it comes to ice from melted snow, courts usually determine liability by considering whether the business or commercial landowner had knowledge (or should have had knowledge) that ice would form in certain spots but failed to take reasonable measures eliminate it or provide adequate warning to invitees.

For example, a shopping center owner in Towson was found liable several days after a snowstorm because of ice that had formed from a melting snow pile. The owner had plowed the snow into a corner of the parking lot but the only location for the water from the melt to drain was across the lot, near the store entrances. The owner was found liable for a customer’s slip and fall on ice that formed from the melted runoff because the owner knew or should have known about the hazard and had not salted or taken any other measures to eliminate the ice during the time that the stores remained open in the evening. In another case, an owner piled snow on either side of a sidewalk knowing that the water from melting would collect on (and would flow over) the sidewalk. The owner did not take any precautions (salting, etc.) and was found liable for an injury resulting from ice on the sidewalk.

The common thread among most cases that resulted in a finding of owner liability is that the injury to the invitee occurred several days after a snowfall, and on a hazard that the invitee did not know about. When the potential risk is clear to the invitee, however, and the invitee makes the decision to assume the risk anyway, the owner is usually not liable. For example, an invitee that decides to park and walk across a parking lot that is covered in snow assumes the risk of injury, as does an invitee who decides to step over a snow-packed curb rather than walk along a salted path.

The bottom line for business and commercial landowners, however, is to avoid waiting too long to shovel and salt clear paths for all of those who visit your business or property, and if you know (or should know) that ice will form in certain spots because of the melting snow, do not ignore it. Take steps to identify and salt potential slick spots that may not be readily apparent to a visitor, particularly during hours when visitors are invited onto the property.

Here are a few related points regarding liability for snow and ice related injury:

- Clearing public property: For the most part, owners have no duty to shovel or salt a public sidewalk or street, and they may choose to do so without assuming liability for falls (unless the owner’s shoveling or salting creates a more dangerous condition than what originally existed).
- Insurance: provided that your commercial general liability coverage is in place, owners should have coverage for lawsuits arising from slip and fall injuries. This would be a good time, however, to make sure that there is ample coverage and that the policy has not lapsed for some reason. There are Maryland laws that require an insurer to give notice before a policy is canceled.
- Home or landowners who permit others to use their property for recreational use (e.g., sledding) without charge: there is a Maryland law that insulates these property owners for liability for injury. The “Maryland Recreational Use Statute” provides that when a landowner permits others to use his or her property for unsupervised recreational activities without charge, the landowner is not liable for any injury to those users, unless the landowner “willfully or maliciously” fails to warn against a known dangerous condition.

For more information regarding this story or related topics, please contact Josh Glikin by email at glikin@bowie-jensen.com or by phone at 443-921-4233.