Humphrey v. Byron, 447 Mass. 322 (2006)

Citation: Humphrey v. Byron, 447 Mass. 322 (2006) 3.
Parent Document: Humphrey v. Byron, 447 Mass. 322 (2006)
Jurisdiction: Massachusetts (state)
Effective Date: 2006-07-21
Original Source: https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/6579392/humphrey-v-byron/ ↗

Full Text

1,228 chars

3. Duty of commercial landlord. Prior to our Young decision, *326Massachusetts adhered to the common-law rule of let the lessee beware: “The tenant took the premises as he found them.” Young v. Garwacki, supra at 165, citing Gade v. National Creamery Co., 324 Mass. 515, 518 (1949). “[Djuring the term of the rental, ‘there could be no tort liability for nonfeasance in the absence of an agreement, for consideration, that the landlord would keep the premises in a condition of safety, and make all repairs without notice.’ ” Young v. Garwacki, supra at 166, quoting DiMarzo v. S. & P. Realty Corp., 364 Mass. 510, 513 (1974). As to residential tenancies, we did away with this “ancient law,” Young v. Garwacki, supra at 168, and adopted the rule that “landlords as other persons must exercise reasonable care not to subject others to an unreasonable risk of harm. A landlord must act as a reasonable person under all of the circumstances including the likelihood of injury to others, the probable seriousness of such injuries, and the burden of reducing or avoiding the risk.” Young v. Garwacki, supra at 169, quoting Sargent v. Ross, 113 N.H. 388, 397-398 (1973). Humphrey urges us to extend this rule to commercial landlords.

Other Sections in This Document (30)

Full Text