skip to Main Content

PREMISES LIABILITY: Superior Court holds that an issue of fact exists as to whether snow removal contractor had and breached obligation to remove snow

PREMISES LIABILITY: Superior Court Holds That An Issue Of Fact Exists As To Whether Snow Removal Contractor Had And Breached Obligation To Remove Snow

The snow removal contractor’s agreement required snow removal when there was a snowfall of at least two inches.  Prior to the day of the slip and fall, there was snow on the ground and snow fell on the accident date in an amount that might have been a bit more or less than two inches.  The snow had not been cleared at the time of the incident.

The snow removal contractor moved for summary judgment, claiming that it had no obligation.  In denying the motion, the court concluded that the evidence was unclear as to how the two-inch requirement was triggered.  The evidence before the court indicated that the property owner would call for snow removal whenever there was an inch or two of snow.

The court concluded that it was unclear as to whether the contractual obligation was in practice subject to a two-inch trigger.  Additionally, the court concludes that an issue of fact existed as to whether the contractor was required to assess the premises to determine whether salting was required and seek permission from the premises owner.

Hidalgo v. Sima Excavating & Landscaping, LLC, CV14-602538-S (8/7/17)

Interested in more information?
Contact us now for experienced and professional legal counsel.

This is Attorney Advertising. This web site is designed for general information only. The information presented at this site should not be construed to be formal legal advice nor the formation of a lawyer/client relationship.