Reitzick v. Ellen Realty, Inc.

Mason, J., delivered the opinion of the Court. This appeal arose from a suit for damages in Baltimore City Court (Sodaro, J.), for injuries sustained by the appellant, Hilda Reitzick. In the early hours of November 14, 1968, she slipped and fell on the sidewalk leading to her apartment, which she shared with her brother in the Liberty West Apartments, owned and operated by appellee, Ellen Realty, Inc. At the close of appellant’s case, the appellee moved for and was granted a directed verdict in its favor. Appellant contends here that she did present a sufficient case of primary negligence against her landlord, and that the case should have been submitted to the jury.

In considering a motion for directed verdict in favor of the defendant at the close of plaintiffs case, the trial judge must assume the truth of all credible evidence and of all inferences fairly deducible therefrom in a light most favorable to the plaintiff. The trial judge must submit the ²⁷⁵ case to the jury “if there is any evidence, however slight, legally sufficient as tending to prove negligence, the weight and value of such evidence being left to the jury.” Curley v. General Valet Service, 270 Md. 248, 264 , 311 A. 2d 231 (1973). The evidence adduced by the appellant established that slightly more than three inches of snow had fallen on November 12, 1968. The testimony of the apartment complex’s resident manager (who lived across the street from appellant) indicated that the standard operating procedures for plowing and salting each sidewalk had indeed been carried out after this particular snowfall.

Appellant admitted that the snow had been cleared from the sidewalk when she left for work the following morning at 8 a.m., and that she encountered no difficulty at that time. Her testimony indicated that the snow had been piled along the sides of the walkway. Upon her return home in the early hours of November 14, she slipped and fell while stepping onto the sidewalk. She described the sidewalk as a “sheet of glass”, although she apparently did not notice this condition until after she fell, as she had assumed the sidewalk was clear.

She suffered injuries necessitating hospital care as a result of the fall. Appellee contends the above is insufficient to constitute a prima facie case of negligence against the property owner, because there was no evidence as to when or how the ice had formed. Appellant’s brother testified that he had arrived home that evening sometime after dark, and that he had no recollection of the sidewalk being slippery at that time. Also, no evidence was offered as to the grading or drainage pattern of the premises.

A landlord in Maryland has the duty to exercise reasonable care to protect tenants from injuries resulting from ice upon the common approaches to apartment buildings. Langley Park Apts. v. Lund, Adm’r., 234 Md. 402 , 199 A. 2d 620 (1964). However, the plaintiff must ordinarily show that the landlord had actual or constructive notice either of the presence of ice and snow in the common way, or of the existence of a dangerous condition in the premises likely to work injury by causing such an accumulation. ²⁷⁶ Thus, the Court of Appeals in Lund analyzed the landlord’s duty as follows: “We do not mean to suggest that the mere fact that snow has accumulated will in and of itself result in a liability upon the landlord, for that would make him virtually an insurer. . . . [Liability] may result .. . provided ... [the landlord] knew, or in the exercise of reasonable care should have known, of the existence of a dangerous condition and failed to act within a reasonable time thereafter to protect against injury by reason of it. ” (Emphasis added) 234