## Facts

- Darlene Newton moved to Petersburg, Alaska, and lived with her husband, Stan Newton, in a house leased within Magill’s Trailer Park, owned by Enid and Fred Magill.
- The house’s front door opened onto a wooden walkway approximately six feet by five feet that served only the Newtons’ residence.
- The walkway was partially covered by an overhanging roof, had no handrail, and lacked anti-slip material.
- On November 20, 1988, Darlene Newton slipped and fell on the walkway, fracturing her ankle.
- The Newtons alleged the walkway had been slippery and hazardous for a substantial period and that the landlords negligently failed to correct the condition.

## Issues

1. Whether Alaska’s traditional common-law rule generally immunizing landlords from liability for dangerous conditions in leased premises remained valid after enactment of Alaska’s Uniform Residential Landlord and Tenant Act (URLTA).
2. Whether Alaska law imposes on landlords a general duty of reasonable care to tenants, including for hazards in areas under the tenant’s exclusive control.
3. Whether summary judgment for the landlords was proper when the trial court denied any landlord duty based on the location of the hazard.

## Decision

- The Alaska Supreme Court reversed the superior court’s grant of summary judgment to the landlords.
- The court held the traditional rule of landlord immunity for dangerous conditions in leased premises no longer applied after enactment of the URLTA.
- The court adopted a general negligence standard: landlords owe tenants a duty of reasonable care in light of all the circumstances.
- The case was remanded for further proceedings under the reasonable-care standard rather than a categorical no-duty rule tied to whether the area was “common” or exclusively used by the tenant.

## Legal Principles

- Landlord liability to tenants is governed by ordinary negligence principles (duty, breach, causation, damages), not broad categorical immunity based on the defect’s location.
- Enactment of the URLTA is inconsistent with a general doctrine insulating landlords from liability for unsafe conditions within leased premises.
- A landlord’s duty of care is not confined to common areas; it extends to risks of harm to tenants when reasonable care under the circumstances requires preventative action.

## Conclusion

The Alaska Supreme Court rejected broad landlord immunity and held that, after the URLTA, landlords owe tenants a general duty of reasonable care under all the circumstances; because the trial court relied on an obsolete no-duty rule tied to exclusive tenant use, summary judgment was reversed and the case remanded.


Newton v. Magill, 872 P.2d 1213 (Alaska 1994)