Negligence – Parking lot

Listen to this article

Where (1) a plaintiff, finding a convenience store parking lot to be full, parked her car in an adjoining lot serving an apartment building, (2) having exited her car, the plaintiff was injured when she tripped over an allegedly defective cement parking bumper and (3) she now seeks to hold liable the convenience store owner and operator as well as the apartment building owner, I conclude that none of these defendants breached any duty owed to the plaintiff and accordingly that they must all be granted summary judgment.

"… There was absolutely no reason why she could not have walked around the bump and the metal bar protruding from it.

"The signage on the [defendant] ALIR [Realty] property stated that the parking spaces on that property were for apartment tenants only. There was no evidence that [defendant Robinson's News, Inc.] suggested or authorized its customers to park on the ALIR property. There is no evidence that ALIR authorized Robinson's customers or anyone other than ALIR apartment tenants to park on ALIR property.

"[Plaintiff Rafella L.] Ricciardi asserts that the hanging of a banner which advertises an ATM on a fence would lead someone to believe that Robinson invited them or led them to park on ALIR property is without any basis in fact. Not only was that assertion not set forth in her affidavit, there is absolutely no rational basis for her to make such an assertion. Simply stating something does not make it true. At best, the ATM sign would invite someone to use the ATM, nothing more.

"Ricciardi had no right to be on ALIR' s property. … There has been no evidence of willful, wanton or reckless disregard for Ricciardi's safety.

"Generally, defendants in the positions of Shanta [Realty Trust]/Robinson do not owe any duty of care for injuries arising on property which they do not maintain, own or control. … And that is the case here. Nor is there is any credible evidence that Shanta or Robinson invited, authorized or encouraged Ricciardi to use ALIR property.

"Assuming that any of the defendants owed a duty to Ricciardi, the condition of cement parking bumper and the metal rod was open and obvious. She saw it and there was no duty to warn her that the conditions were not one that warranted a duty to warn of her hazards which were plainly visible and avoidable to her."

Riccardi v. Conte, et al. (Lawyers Weekly No. 16-003-09) (3 pages) (Wexler, J.) (Chelsea District Court) (Docket No. 0514CV479) (March 18, 2009).