McDevitt v. Sportsman's Warehouse, Inc.
151 Idaho 280
| Idaho | 2011Background
- McDevitt slipped on a recessed irrigation box on the sidewalk outside Sportsman's Warehouse in a Canyon Park East Shopping Center, Twin Falls, Idaho.
- Sportsman's, Canyon Park, and several related entities were parties under a lease and related covenants controlling premises and common areas.
- The lease assigns to Canyon Park the duty to maintain common areas; Sportsman's premises are described as the building within exterior walls, not the sidewalk.
- Common Area defined in CC&Rs includes land outside buildings, with maintenance duties allocated to Canyon Park; Sportsman's has an easement to use the common areas.
- Idaho Scapes installed the irrigation system and irrigation box; Eckman & Mitchell poured the sidewalk around the box; the developer owner directed design and placement.
- The district court granted summary judgment for Sportsman’s, holding no duty to invitees to keep the non-leased sidewalk safe or warn of hazards; McDevitt appealed and the Idaho Supreme Court affirmed.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Sportsman's owed a duty to invitees to keep the sidewalk safe. | McDevitt contends the sidewalk is part of the premises or within Sportsman's control. | Sportsman's argues the sidewalk is outside the leased premises and not under its control. | No; the sidewalk was not part of the leased premises and Sportsman's did not control it. |
| Whether extending duty to common area paths in a multi-tenant mall is warranted. | McDevitt urges expansion of Idaho negligence law to require warnings in common ingress/egress areas. | Sportsman's argues against expanding duty to non-leased common areas. | Court declines to expand negligence law to apply to common areas in multi-tenant centers. |
| Did Sportsman's create the hazard regarding the irrigation box sidewalk? | McDevitt claims Sportsman's bore responsibility as the abutting owner. | Hazard was created by Idaho Scapes and Eckman & Mitchell and lies with Canyon Park per the lease. | No; the irrigation box was installed by a third party and the lease allocated responsibility to Canyon Park for common areas. |
| Attorney fees on appeal. | McDevitt seeks fees as the prevailing party. | Sportsman's seeks fees for frivolous appeal. | No attorney fees awarded on appeal. |
Key Cases Cited
- Harrison v. Taylor, 115 Idaho 588, 768 P.2d 1321 (1989) (premises liability duties to invitees; tenant control matters)
- Johnson v. K-Mart Corp., 126 Idaho 316, 882 P.2d 971 (Ct.App.1994) (tenant duty to maintain leased premises; control limits liability outside lease)
- Heath v. Honker's Mini-Mart, Inc., 134 Idaho 711, 8 P.3d 1254 (Ct.App.2000) (no duty to adjacent unowned property; expansion of liability is disfavored)
- Boise Car & Truck Rental Co. v. Waco, Inc., 108 Idaho 780, 702 P.2d 818 (1985) (creation of hazard by tenant construction; liability focus on who created hazard and control)
- McKinley v. Fanning, 100 Idaho 189, 595 P.2d 1084 (1979) (landlord-created dangerous condition on public sidewalk; special rule for abutting owner)
- Page v. Pasquali, 150 Idaho 150, 244 P.3d 1236 (2010) (interpretation of unambiguous contract is law; ambiguity questions are factual)
- City of Chubbuck v. City of Pocatello, 127 Idaho 198, 899 P.2d 411 (1995) (contract interpretation and legal standard for ambiguity)