Risk-Sharing Don’t Let Sidewalks Trip You Up The much-anticipated season of Spring has finally arrived. Robins and other songbirds are back. Flowers are starting to bloom. The sound of lawn equipment is starting to resound through the neighborhoods. And the toll of Winter’s cold temperatures, snow, ice, freezing, thawing and the efforts to combat those effects are evident in the condition of streets and sidewalks. This article addresses two aspects of law relating to sidewalks. The first issue is who is responsible for sidewalks along state highways that run through cities and towns: the state or the city? The second issue is who is responsible for sidewalks in front of residences or businesses. Many municipalities in South Dakota have state highways running smack dab through town. If someone trips and falls, who has “control” of the sidewalks in the highway right-of-way running through town, the State or the City? According to the South Dakota Supreme Court, the answer is: The City. See Patitucci v City of Hill City, 2013 SD 62. In that case, a visiting tourist tripped and fell on a sidewalk in front of a commercial business on Main Street, which is also U.S. Highway 385. Designed and constructed by the State as part of a re-design of Highway
385, the sidewalk in question had two levels. In the ensuing litigation, the City argued it had no duty to the injured tourist because it lacked control over the sidewalk the State designed and built. On appeal, the Supreme Court noted several state statutes, SDCL 9-45-1 and SDCL Ch. 9-46, grant municipalities authority over the sidewalks, but none of these statutes limit that authority when the sidewalk is within a State highway right-of-way in the municipality. As such, the City had the duty of keeping the sidewalk in a reasonably safe condition and a duty to warn of unsafe conditions. But, what of the fact that this fall occurred in front of a commercial business? What triggers their liability? That is dictated by statute and case law and depends on various factors, as follows: j
Did the landowner create or maintain the condition that caused the injury? Such examples may include the abutting landowner excavating the sidewalk, or placing objects on the sidewalk. If the landowner creates or maintains the condition, the landowner owes a duty to maintain the sidewalk in a reasonably safe condition for pedestrians to use. This is called the “special use” doctrine.
j
SDCL 9-46-2 imposes a statutory duty on property owners to keep abutting sidewalks reasonably safe. w Landowners who reside on the property have a duty to keep the sidewalks in repair. This makes sense, since the residential owners are generally most familiar with the condition of the walks in front of their own homes. w Non-resident property owners (usually commercial businesses where the owner does not also live) must make repairs when notified by the municipality. w In either situation, the failure of residential owners to keep sidewalks in good repair, or the failure of a
SOUTH DAKOTA BASIC CODE Affordable Codification for Small and Mid-Sized South Dakota Municipalities A comprehensive model code of ordinances for municipalities featuring: x Subject matter encountered by municipalities x Annual state law updates x
x x
38
A comprehensive index and a title devoted to your unique local ordinances Published by American Legal and the South Dakota Municipal League For more information call or e-mail deRicci Getty at 1-800-445-5588 or dgetty@amlegal.com SOUTH DAKOTA MUNICIPALITIES
