Skip to main content
DRAFT FOR ATTORNEY REVIEW — NOT FINAL

Tucker v. Hayford, 75 P.3d 980 (2003)

Citation
Tucker v. Hayford, 75 P.3d 980 (2003)
Parent Document
Tucker v. Hayford, 75 P.3d 980 (2003)
Jurisdiction
Washington (state)
Effective Date
2003-09-04

Other Sections in This Document (56)

Full Text

883 chars
In Brown the landlord had notice of the tenant's problem (a high door sill). The holding in Brown turned on the nature of the claimed defect, not notice. The contract required the landlord to keep the common areas "reasonably clean and safe from defects increasing the hazards of fire or accident." Brown, 105 Wash.App. at 804, 21 P.3d 716. So, the court reasoned, the landlord was only obligated to do something about the door sill if it was unsafe. All agreed the door sill was inconvenient for the tenants, but nobody— not the landlord, the tenants, nor a state agent who inspected the premises for a residential adult care facility license—considered it unsafe. Id. at 802, 803, 805, 21 P.3d 716. The court ultimately held that the landlord would not be liable under the contract's safety provision because the door sill was not then unreasonably unsafe. Id. at 805, 21 P.3d 716.