White v. Heffernan
| Decision Date | 22 April 1938 |
| Docket Number | No. 7871.,7871. |
| Citation | 198 A. 566 |
| Parties | WHITE v. HEFFERNAN et al. |
| Court | Rhode Island Supreme Court |
Exceptions from Superior Court, Providence and Bristol Counties; Alexander L. Churchill, Judge.
Action of trespass on the case for negligence by Shirley White against Thomas L. Heffernan and others. The defendants' demurrer to the plaintiff's amended declaration was sustained, and the plaintiff brings an exception.
Exception overruled and case remitted.
Fergus J. McOsker, of Providence, for plaintiff. Dooley, Jackvony, Curran & Dunn, of Providence, for defendants.
In this action of trespass on the case for negligence the defendants' demurrer to the plaintiff's amended declaration was sustained by the superior court. The case is now before us on the plaintiff's exception to this ruling.
The plaintiff's amended declaration alleged, in substance, that the defendants were owners, as tenants in common, of certain premises in Providence; that they were occupied by the plaintiff as tenant under an agreement with a tenant of the defendants of said premises; that the defendants at the time of the injuries complained of permitted a dangerous condition to exist on such premises, in that the rear stairway to the back yard was so constructed that one stepping from the interior of the building onto the topmost step was obliged to turn sharply to the left, instead of proceeding straight forward, in order to descend; and that said stairway was unlighted by any artificial illumination.
The amended declaration then further set out that because of the maintenance by the defendants of the hereinbefore described nuisance upon such premises, it was the duty of the defendants to install at such stairway artificial lighting so that the plaintiff would not be injured while descending the stairway after dark, but that the defendants failed to perform their duty in this respect, by reason whereof the plaintiff, while in the exercise of due care, missed her step when in the act of descending such stairway, fell, and was injured.
The defendants demurred to this declaration on several grounds, the more important of which were that it did not appear by said declaration that the defendants had any right of control over the premises occupied by the plaintiff, under an agreement with a tenant of the defendants; that it did not appear by said declaration that the defendants were guilty of any negligence; that they were under any such legal duty as the plaintiff alleged; or that the form of construction of the stairway in question was inherently dangerous.
We are of the opinion that the defendants' demurrer is good. The plaintiff does not dispute that this court has held that the owner of a building, rented for business purposes, who keeps control of its entries, hallways, and stairways, is under no duty, as a matter of law, even to a stranger rightfully upon the premises, to artificially light the ordinary entries, hallways, and stairways, they being inherently safe and convenient and nothing in their surroundings calling for special care. Capen v. Hall, 21 R.I. 364, 43 A. 847.
In the instant case, however, the allegations of the amended declaration show that the plaintiff is not a stranger to the premises, but a subtenant. In Gorski v. Consolidated Rendering Co., 41 R.I. 339, 103 A. 907, it was decided that, in regard to injuries received from defects in premises, a subtenant has no greater right of recovery from the owner than has the tenant himself, and that the subtenant is governed by the same rules and is subject...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Corcione v. Ruggieri
...has. Henson v. Beckwith, 20 R.I. 165, 37 A. 702, 38 L.R.A. 716; Davis v. Smith, 26 R.I. 129, 58 A. 630, 66 L.R.A. 478; White v. Heffernan, 60 R.I. 363, 198 A. 566, 32 Am.Jur., Landlord and Tenant, § 665. It is also well settled that there is no implied warranty on the part of a landlord tha......
-
Dodge v. Parish of Church of Transfiguration
...the walk. The trial justice based his grant of defendant's motion solely on the basis of the holding of this court in White v. Heffernan, 60 R.I. 363, 198 A. 566. There we reiterated the common-law rule that a landlord who retains control of the entries, hallways and stairways is under no d......
-
Zatloff v. Winkleman
...defect of which the landlord had actual knowledge and the tenant had no notice. Corcione v. Ruggieri, R.I., 139 A.2d 388; White v. Heffernan, 60 R.I. 363, 198 A. 566; Leonick v. Manville Jenckes Corp., 60 R.I. 247, 198 A. 245; Gorski v. Consolidated Rendering Co., 41 R.I. 339, 103 A. 907; C......
-
Maggi v. De Fusco
...him to the lessee. Marsh v. Bliss Realty, Inc., 97 R.I. 27, 195 A.2d 331; Corcione v. Ruggieri, 87 R.I. 182, 139 A.2d 388; White v. Heffernan, 60 R.I. 363, 198 A. 566; Gorski v. Consolidated Rendering Co., 41 R.I. 339, 103 A. 907; Whitehead v. Comstock & Co., 25 R.I. 423, 56 A. The facts of......