Vermont supreme court makes radical change to premises liability law

more+
less-

Decision makes it easier for visitor to recover for injuries on business premises.

In a significant decision issued on Friday, July 18, 2014, involving a retail store, the Vermont Supreme Court has abolished the old premises liability distinction between “business invitees” (i.e., customers) and licensees (other visitors). The Court has now formally adopted a general negligence standard of reasonable care applicable to both types of visitors. The case is Demag v. Better Power Equipment, Inc., 2014 VT 78. http://info.libraries.vermont.gov/supct/current/op2013-120.html

This case involved a visitor who was on the defendant’s business premises not as a customer, but as a vendor providing a service to the business. He fell into a storm drain in the business’s parking lot because the drain cover had been dislodged by a snowplow. The owners of the business claimed not to know that the storm drain cover had been dislodged. The visitor sued the business. The trial court classified the visitor as a “licensee” (i.e., not a customer) – as opposed to an “invitee” (i.e., a customer) and granted summary judgment to the business, reasoning that the business owed a lower standard of care to a licensee. In other words, because the visitor was a licensee, the owners owed him no legal duty to be aware that the storm drain cover had been dislodged and posed a danger to him. The Vermont Supreme Court reversed, ruling that there should no longer be any distinction in Vermont between a licensee and an invitee.

In 99% of cases, this decision will generally not affect retail or business establishments, because, with respect to customers, they were already held to the higher standard for “invitees.”  However, sometimes the person who is injured in or around a business establishment might be a vendor. In such cases, the business establishment can no longer argue that it has a lower standard of care because the vendor was a “licensee.”  The legal standard will now be the same regardless of whether the plaintiff is a customer of the business or a vendor. Obviously, this decision has implications for business establishments. While vendors who are injured while on another business’s premises will typically be covered by their own employer’s workers compensation insurance, they can still bring a claim against the business establishment for negligence. This decision will potentially make their claim easier to prove.

Topics:  Corporate Counsel, Negligence, Premises Liability, Reasonable Care, Retailers

Published In: Civil Procedure Updates, Personal Injury Updates

DISCLAIMER: Because of the generality of this update, the information provided herein may not be applicable in all situations and should not be acted upon without specific legal advice based on particular situations.

© Downs Rachlin Martin PLLC | Attorney Advertising

Don't miss a thing! Build a custom news brief:

Read fresh new writing on compliance, cybersecurity, Dodd-Frank, whistleblowers, social media, hiring & firing, patent reform, the NLRB, Obamacare, the SEC…

…or whatever matters the most to you. Follow authors, firms, and topics on JD Supra.

Create your news brief now - it's free and easy »