Cain v. Birge & Held Property Management, L.L.C., 2:23-cv-00695

Plaintiff Rhonda Cain fell and was injured descending a staircase at her sister Pamela White's apartment in the Hidden Creek Apartment complex, managed by Defendant Birge & Held Property Management, LLC (B&H).
The incident occurred on August 31, 2021; evidence showed the staircase had a broken step and inadequate lighting, with alleged longstanding disrepair.
Prior to the fall, neither Cain nor White directly notified B&H of issues with the staircase; routine property inspections were conducted by B&H staff but did not specifically target the stairwells.
Cain asserted negligence and negligence per se under Ohio’s Landlord-Tenant Act, supported by an expert opinion that the conditions violated building codes and reasonable safety standards.
B&H moved for summary judgment, arguing lack of duty, lack of notice, and absence of breach, while Cain moved for partial summary judgment on breach and duty, and on B&H’s affirmative defenses.
The court granted in part and denied in part Cain’s motion, denied B&H’s motion, and found triable factual issues on duty, breach, constructive notice, and major defenses.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Duty and Source of Duty	B&H had duty under Ohio law, common law, and management contract to inspect and repair common areas, including the staircase.	No specific affirmative duty to inspect exists under Ohio law or the contract; only required to respond to notice.	Landlord owed duty to keep common areas safe, but actionable only upon actual or constructive notice.
Constructive Notice and Breach	The dangerous condition was obviously discoverable in any reasonable inspection, establishing constructive notice.	Reasonable inspections occurred and did not reveal the defect; no constructive notice.	Triable factual issue exists as to constructive notice and breach.
Open and Obvious Doctrine	The defective step was not open and obvious given poor lighting and condition.	Condition was open and obvious so no duty to warn; doctrine bars liability.	Genuine issue of fact whether defect was open and obvious.
Affirmative Defenses (including Step-in-dark)	No contributory negligence; moved for judgment on all B&H’s affirmative defenses.	Cain was contributorily negligent by stepping into darkness; other defenses apply.	Only granted summary judgment on one defense (failure to state claim); factual issues remain on others.

Shroades v. Rental Homes, Inc., 427 N.E.2d 774 (Ohio 1981) (delineates landlord liability for injuries caused by failure to fulfill statutory duties)
Sikora v. Wenzel, 727 N.E.2d 1277 (Ohio 2000) (negligence per se excused if landlord lacked reasonable notice)
Menifee v. Ohio Welding Products, Inc., 472 N.E.2d 707 (Ohio 1984) (sets out elements of a negligence claim)
Armstrong v. Best Buy Co., 788 N.E.2d 1088 (Ohio 2003) (defines open and obvious doctrine in premises liability)
Posin v. A.B.C. Motor Ct. Hotel, Inc., 344 N.E.2d 334 (Ohio 1976) (establishes step-in-the-dark rule for contributory negligence)