Vacant Commercial Property Owners Face Sidewalk Liability in New Jersey

The New Jersey Supreme Court has ruled that all commercial landowners — including owners of vacant commercial lots — have a duty to maintain the public sidewalks abutting their property in reasonably good condition and are liable to pedestrians injured as a result of their negligent failure to do so.

The high court created a new rule that it said is guided by the principle of fairness and that no longer treats vacant properties differently than those with structures or active businesses.

“There is something profoundly unfair about commercial property owners purchasing vacant lots and having no responsibility whatsoever for maintaining the area where the general public traverses,” the court commented in a 4-3 opinion penned by Justice Fabiana Pierre-Louis.

The majority relied upon a language in a 1983 ruling Hopkins v. Fox & Lazo Realtors: “Whether a person owes a duty of reasonable care toward another turns on whether the imposition of such a duty satisfies an abiding sense of basic fairness under all of the circumstances in light of considerations of public policy.”

In the high court’s view, this principle means that “it matters not that there is no structure or active business being conducted on a commercial property.”

The court said that purchasing a vacant commercial lot is a business decision that embraces the costs of conducting business and one of the costs includes maintaining the abutting sidewalks so that they are in a reasonably safe condition for innocent passersby.

With its ruling, the high court reversed and remanded back to the appellate court a negligence suit brought against the owners of a vacant property in Camden by a woman who claims she fell on the sidewalk and sustained injuries that required surgery.

The high court noted that the sidewalk liability distinction between commercial and residential properties remains but the law should no longer treat certain types of commercial properties differently.

The opinion also notes that the court has in the past urged the state Legislature to clarify the law on sidewalk liability but that has not happened.