## Facts

- Richard J. Mahnke owned a two-unit duplex, lived in the lower unit, and rented the upper unit to John and Mary Katherine Blattner under an oral lease that included Mahnke’s agreement to make necessary repairs.
- The duplex had balcony porches; some railings were being replaced as older wooden railings deteriorated, but the upper back porch still had a wooden railing.
- The upper back porch railing consisted of nailed wooden sections attached to posts, without screws, bolts, or braces.
- On May 10, 1974, after the Blattners moved out, Mrs. Blattner’s brothers returned to remove remaining furniture and asked James Pagelsdorf to help.
- While moving furniture, Pagelsdorf leaned on or placed weight on the second-story balcony railing; it failed, and he fell and was injured.
- Inspection after the accident showed the railing assembly had dry rot.
- Pagelsdorf alleged Mahnke undertook repairs and had notice of deterioration; Mahnke denied knowledge of any specific defect.

## Issues

1. Whether a landlord owes a duty of ordinary care in maintaining leased residential premises to the tenant and to persons on the premises with the tenant’s permission, despite the traditional common-law rule limiting landlord liability.

## Decision

- The Wisconsin Supreme Court reversed the judgment dismissing the complaint and remanded for further proceedings.
- The court held that a landlord must exercise ordinary care toward the tenant and others on the premises with the tenant’s permission.
- The court concluded the trial court erred by submitting the case under the traditional landlord nonliability framework rather than instructing on ordinary care and ordinary negligence principles.

## Legal Principles

- Landlords in Wisconsin owe a general duty of ordinary care in the maintenance of leased premises to tenants and permitted visitors.
- The traditional common-law rule of broad landlord nonliability (subject only to limited exceptions) is abrogated.
- Liability for injuries caused by unsafe conditions on leased premises is determined under ordinary negligence analysis (duty, breach, causation, damages), rather than by asking whether a narrow exception to landlord immunity applies.
- Treating residential leases as contracts and recognizing an implied warranty of habitability supports imposing tort responsibility for negligent failure to maintain safe premises.

## Conclusion

Wisconsin replaced the traditional landlord-immunity approach with a general negligence duty: landlords must use ordinary care in maintaining leased residential property, and tenants and their permitted visitors may recover for injuries caused by the landlord’s negligent maintenance.


Pagelsdorf v. Safeco Ins. Co. of Am., 91 Wis. 2d 734, 284 N.W.2d 55 (Wis. 1979)