The Portland daily press., 1892-04-20
LANDLORDS And TENANTS.
Important Opinion Regarding Their
Respective Liabilities.

EAceptions S"' - VAC sun OF george
W. Abbott Against the Brown Estate
and New Trial Granted-The Defend
ant Estate Not Liable.
The law court has just handed down
an opinion in the case of Geo. w. Abbott
against the trustees of the estate of the
late John B. Brown, which declares SO
clearly the law relative to the respective
liabilities of landlords and tenants for
damages resulting to third persons
through neglect to keep leased premises
in repair, that we print the opinion in
full. The facts are set forth in the opin-
ion, which was drawn by Judge wal
ton and is as follows:
The'plaintiff has obtrined verdict for
$1,000 again ST the trustees of the estate of
the late John B. Brown for injuries
claimed to have been received through
their negligence. The case is before the
law court on motion and exceptions.
We think the exceptions must be sus-
tanned. The negligence complained of
was the omission to keep in repair rail
road crossing on Browns Wharf in Port
land. The crossing led into a lumber
shed owned by Mark F. Emery, and the
crossing was built for and used exclusive
ly as means of entering the shed. 1t is
admitted that the shed stood ON land
own ed by the Brown estate; but it was
denied that the estate or the trustees
were under any obligations to keep the
crossing leading into the shed in repair.
Upon this point the jury were instructed
as follows
Within the limits of the tenancy tenant is
under obligations 70 repair and maintain the
and convenient manner ; but he is not obliged
legally, as far as the public is concerned, to
maintain in reasonably safe and convenient
by another; that responsibility and burden rests
upon the owner himself; so if the spot upon the
wharf where the accident occurred was not
within the limits of Emerys tenancy not within
the limits of the territory occupied by him. then
the owners Of this property, having leased it to
Mr.. Emery. are under the duty to all persons
who do business with Mr. Emery to provide
reasonably safe access to that property.
This ruling seems to be the exact OPP
posite of what the law is. The law re-
quires everyone having place of bust
ness to which he expressly or implicitly
invites others to come to do business
with him, to maintain reasonable safe
means of access to it, Notwithstanding
such place of business is upon leased
land and notwithstanding the means of
access to it is over the land of another.
And the responsibility and burden of
providing such means of access to his
lessee's place of business does not rest
upon the lessor or the owner of the land
over which such access may pass. IAnd
in these particulars the ruling seems to
be the exact opposite of what the law
is {0a
A way, ex vi ternlini implies a right
passage over anothefas land. AS an ease
ment it cannot exist without SERVANT
as we'll as dominant estate. 1.-THE way
must be kept in repairby the owner of the
easement. and not by the owner of land
over which it passes Per Morton, j.,
in Jones vs. Percival Pick. 4S5.
"The owner of the soil was under no
obligation to repair the road, as that
duty belonged to the party for whose
benefit it was constructed" Per Ruger.
c., j., in Herman VS.. Roberts, 119 N. Y.
81 $500.
The lessor of a building is not liable to
one Who, IN passing along walk leading
from street to building for the pur-
pose of transacting business with the
tenant, is injured for the want OF rail
ing, although the premises We're in that
condition prior TO the letting. The oc-
ycupler OF a building, who negligently
permits the building, or the access to it,
to be in an unsafe condition, isliable for
an injury occasioned thereby to person
whom he, by invitation, expressed or i'm
plIed, induces to enter upon it," Per
Morton, j., in Mellen VS.. Morrill,, 1926
Mass, 545.
THE duty of the tenant to keep in safe
condition the demised premises extends
to all the appurtenances connected there
with, and this includes steps, stairways
and other approaches" Per Elliot, j.,
IN Purcell VS.. English, sc Ind, "a.
tits suggested by the plaintiffs coun-
sci that the ruling may be sustained up
on the ground that when there is but
one stairway or passage leading to sew
eral tenements, the duty of keeping such
stairway or passage in repair remains
with the landlord.
1t is impossible to sustain the ruling
upon that ground, for, in the first place,
the ruling was not placed on that ground;
it was placed on an entirely different
ground and in the second place the evil