Nicoletti v. Kest

Facts: A residential tenant of a property with multiple entrances observes the entrance they most commonly use is covered with water due to a rainstorm. The tenant uses the entrance to access the property and is injured due to the presence of rainwater. The tenant seeks to recover their losses due to their injuries from the landlord.

Claim: The tenant claims the landlord is liable since the landlord failed to install any warning, and the tenant by necessity used the entrance as it was the entrance the tenant most commonly used.

Counterclaim: The landlord claims the tenant cannot recover losses from the landlord since the dangerous condition was obvious and served as its own warning to the tenant and the tenant had the use of an alternative the entrance to access their unit.

Holding: A California appeals court holds the landlord is not liable for the tenant’s losses due to the injuries since the dangerous condition was obvious and served as a warning to the tenant, and the tenant had no reason not to use another available access. [Nicoletti v. Kest (2023) 97 CA5th 140]

Nicoletti v. Kest

Related Recent Case Decisions

Is a property owner liable for a guest’s injury that occurs on a public street adjacent to their property?

Is a property owner liable for injuries to a guest resulting from unsafe conditions near their property?

Is a property owner liable for injuries sustained by an independent contractor due to a hazardous condition known to the owner and discoverable by the contractor?

Related Reading:

Property Management: Chapter 37: Care and maintenance of property

Landlords, Tenants and Property Management: Chapter 29: Dangerous on-site and off-site activities