Morgan v. Sheppard

• Court: Supreme Court of Alabama
• Writing for the Court: ANDERSON, J.
• Citation: 156 Ala. 403,47 So. 147
• Parties: MORGAN v. SHEPPARD.
• Decision Date: 18 June 1908

47 So. 147

156 Ala. 403

MORGAN
v.
SHEPPARD.

Supreme Court of Alabama

June 18, 1908

Appeal from Circuit Court, Jefferson County; A. A. Coleman, Judge.

Action by Sallie S. Morgan against Frank G. Sheppard for injuries received on leased premises owned by defendant. From a judgment for defendant, plaintiff appeals. Reversed and remanded.

The substance of the counts discussed in the opinion are sufficiently set out therein, except the fifth count, which is as follows: "Plaintiff claims of defendant $10,000 as damages, for that heretofore, to wit, on the 11th day of December, 1903, defendant owned a certain house and steps connected therewith, to wit, 1038 North Nineteenth street, which house and steps defendant shortly theretofore had leased or let to Mrs. E. P. Bassinger, for use and occupancy by her and such persons as she should lawfully thereto invite, and defendant received rent therefor; that said steps became and were in a weak and decayed condition, and thereby highly dangerous to the life or limb of persons using them, and before the injuries hereinafter mentioned were received actually, by himself or his servants or agents, engaged in or about repairing said steps, and so negligently, by himself or agent, conducted himself in and about making such repairs that said steps were on said 11th day of December, 1903, weak and insecure and unsafe for use, and as a proximate consequence thereof said step or steps broke or gave way with plaintiff, while she, by invitation of said Mrs. Bassinger, was rightfully and lawfully using same on said day, during the time that said Mrs. Bassinger was occupying said premises as a tenant of defendant under said leasing or letting, and as a proximate consequence thereof plaintiff suffered the injuries complained of."

The following demurrers were interposed to this count: "It shows no duty on the part of defendant to the plaintiff to put or keep the steps in repair or in a safe condition. (2) No privity of contract is shown between plaintiff and defendant in respect of the contract alleged in the count to have been made by defendant with his lessee, Mrs. Bassinger. (3) The plaintiff being on the premises under the lessee, the defendant owed her no duty to repair, and no facts are averred showing such duty. (4) The plaintiff, as a matter of law, upon the facts alleged in the count, is not entitled to the benefit of the agreement alleged to have been made by the defendant with Mrs. Bassinger, and no facts are alleged showing any independent duty on the defendant's part to the plaintiff in respect to the condition of such steps."

Bowman, Harsh & Beddow, for appellant.

Cabaniss & Bowie, for appellee.

ANDERSON, J.

"At common law it was the well-settled rule that, in the absence of any agreement between the parties, the landlord was under no obligation to his tenant to keep the demised premises in repair. The rule of caveat emptor applies in regard to leases, and the landlord is not even under an implied obligation to remedy defects in the demised premises existing at the time of the demise. It follows, therefore, that, in the absence of any agreement on the part of the landlord to repair, a tenant cannot recover from the landlord the cost of repairs made by him; nor can the tenant recover from the landlord for injuries to his property or person, or to the property or person of his family, caused by the defective condition of the demised premises." 18 Am. & Eng. Ency. of Law, 215; Burks v. Bragg, 89 Ala. 204, 7 So. 156; Taylor on Landlord and Tenant, § 175. As a general rule, the landlord is not liable for injuries to third persons during the tenancy for defects in the premises; and where the landlord has created no nuisance, and is...