BlogLine

New Jersey court rules no dangerous condition in slip-and-fall case against public entity

12/12/24

By: Arielle E. Katz

In a recent ruling by the Superior Court of New Jersey’s Appellate Division, Henry v. Township of Cranford, 2024 WL 4799043 (N.J. App. Div. Nov. 15, 2024), the plaintiff Lois Henry’s slip-and-fall case against the Township of Cranford and the Cranford Conservation Center was dismissed after the court granted summary judgment in favor of the defendants. The decision upholds the trial court’s ruling that the Township was not liable under New Jersey’s Tort Claims Act (“TCA”), which governs liability for injuries caused by dangerous conditions on public property. 

The case stemmed from an incident that occurred when the plaintiff visited the Cranford Conservation Center, a recycling facility operated by the Township. After dropping off recycling, the plaintiff tripped on rocks and gravel in front of a recycling container that was placed to prevent puddling and ice buildup. A plaintiff fractured a foot and sued the Township, claiming the gravel posed a dangerous condition on public property. 

The Township argued there was no dangerous condition on the property, citing the lack of prior incidents and the maintenance practices at the recycling center. The Director of the Township’s Department of Public Works testified that the area was inspected regularly, even though there were no scheduled inspections or regulations specifically regarding the gravel filler. Additionally, an employee on duty at the time of the accident testified he could not recall the incident, but there were no prior complaints about the gravel condition. 

The trial court ruled in favor of the Township, granting summary judgment, and dismissing the complaint with prejudice. The court found there were no genuine issues of material fact to support the claim of a “dangerous condition” under the TCA. The plaintiff appealed and argued there were unresolved issues regarding the nature of the gravel’s condition and whether the Township was negligent in maintaining the area. 

The Appellate Division affirmed the trial court’s ruling because under the TCA, a public entity can only be held liable for injuries if a plaintiff proves the property was in a dangerous condition, the condition caused an injury, and the entity had actual or constructive notice of the condition. The appellate court emphasized that the condition must pose a substantial risk of injury. In this case, there was no evidence of prior accidents or complaints, and the photos presented by the plaintiff did not establish that the gravel constituted a dangerous condition. Additionally, the appellate court found no indication that the Township’s choice of gravel as a surface was “palpably unreasonable” or extreme enough to warrant liability. 

This ruling reinforces the high bar for liability under the TCA, where public entities are generally immune from tort claims unless there is clear evidence of negligence and a substantial risk of harm. A plaintiff must prove that a dangerous condition was present and known to a public entity before an injury occurred to seek liability against the public entity.  

Please contact Arielle E. Katz at arielle.katz@fmglaw.com or your FMG relationship partner to learn more.