Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

683 A.2d 501

Saunders v. Picard

Supreme Judicial Court of Maine

Decided September 27, 1996

Supreme Judicial Court of Maine · decided 1996-09-27

Cited by 1 later decisions — most recently October 2021

1 state decisions

Relies on Nichols v. Marsden

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 1996-09-27

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

ROBERTS, Justice.

¶1Virginia Saunders appeals from a summary judgment against her entered in the Superior Court (Aroostook County, Pierson, J.) on her complaint against her landlord, Antoine Picard, for injuries she sustained in a fall down her cellar stairs. Saunders argues that there exists a genuine issue of material fact concerning Picard’s duty to fix and maintain the stairs. We affirm the judgment.

¶2We have previously stated the common law rule that “a landlord is not liable to a tenant for personal injuries caused by a *502defective condition in premises under the tenant’s exclusive control” except, inter alia, when the landlord “expressly agrees to maintain the premises in good repair.” Nichols v. Marsden, 483 A.2d 341, 343 (Me.1984). We now hold that evidence that Picard fixed the furnace, the water system, and the chimney, without more, will not support an inference that Picard had expressly agreed to maintain the premises in good repair. See Restatement (SECOND) OF PROPERTY § 17.5, Cmt. b(l) (1977).

¶3The entry is:

¶4Judgment affirmed.

¶5All concurring.

/683/a2d/501 · .json · Public domain