Fresenius Medical Care v. Town of Livingston (US District Court, N. Carolina, July 2020)·
Background: Plaintiff alleged that a sewage line became clogged due to Defendant's continued and repeated dumping of kitchen waste, cooking oils, and grease into the sewage system. In an attempt to remedy the clogged line, the Defendant applied high pressure water to the clog, which then caused raw sewage and kitchen grease to back up and overflow into Plaintiff’s space. That flooding occurred on April 21, 2014 and was immediately cleaned up. Within months, Plaintiff's employees began to notice further damage in the form of fungal growth around floor tiles.
Evidence: The Court found that the Plaintiff knew its property flooded with “raw sewage and kitchen grease” on April 21, 2014. It knew the “flooding damage” required immediate remediation, and it was aware of property damage allegedly caused by Defendant’s negligence on April 21, 2014, yet did not file the lawsuit until May 4, 2017.
Court Ruling: The Court dismissed the Plaintiff’s claims because they were filed outside of the two-year statute of limitation, which began to run when the Plaintiff knew of the damages caused by the alleged negligent act on April 21, 2014.
Geraldine Daniels v. Tracy Wiley (Alabama Supreme Court, June 2020)·
Background: Tenant, who claimed to have suffered injury when she slipped and fell while stepping off muddy sidewalk at apartment complex, brought negligence action against Landlord and Landlord's community manager.
Evidence: On December 17, 2016, Plaintiff was walking on the sidewalk from her apartment to the mail kiosk for her building to retrieve her mail. According to Plaintiff, mud had accumulated on the sidewalk as a result of a rain earlier that day. When she stepped off the sidewalk curb, Plaintiff slipped and fell and broke both of her knees. In testimony the Plaintiff admitted that she appreciated the danger created by the mud and that she typically avoided the danger by hopping over the mud.
Court Ruling: Landlord did not owe tenant any general duty to mark sidewalk and curb where mud, which was an open and obvious danger, had accumulated, or to warn tenant of it. The Court further explained that a condition is ‘open and obvious’ when it is known to the plaintiff or should have been observed by the plaintiff in the exercise of reasonable care.
Main Street Amer. Assur. v. Piro Petroleum, Inc. (Connecticut Superior Court, June 2020)·
Background: The Plaintiff, an insurance company, sued for reimbursement against a Realtor for the expenses it incurred in cleaning up an oil spill in a home. The property owner had retained a Realtor to sell the vacant home. The Owner hired a company to service the boiler in the basement and directed the company to contact the Realtor for access. The company then had oil delivered to the boiler and thereafter a significant spill occurred in the basement. The Owner’s insurance company paid for the cleanup and ultimately sued the Realtor for reimbursement, claiming the Realtor had committed negligence by not monitoring the listed property adequately to prevent the spill.
Evidence: The Court found that the Realtor had not agreed to act as a property manager with responsibility to inspect the property, and that Realtor had not even been aware that oil was being delivered, and that the Realtor had caused any delay in noticing the spill or instigating the cleanup.
Court Ruling: The Court dismissed the case against the Realtor and found there was no basis for Realtor to be liable for negligence.
