## Facts

- Jaime Rivas, an on-duty deputy sheriff, entered an apartment complex to serve a witness subpoena on a tenant.
- While walking through the complex’s parking lot, Rivas slipped on ice and suffered serious injuries.
- Rivas alleged the owner and managing agent negligently failed to maintain the parking lot, a common area, in a reasonably safe condition.
- The defendants argued Rivas was only a licensee and that the Fireman’s Rule barred recovery because he was injured while performing law-enforcement duties.
- The circuit court granted summary judgment for the defendants, treating Rivas as a licensee and concluding no duty of ordinary care was owed.

## Issues

1. Whether the Fireman’s Rule bars a law-enforcement officer’s negligence claim for injuries caused by an ordinary premises hazard unrelated to the purpose for the officer’s presence.
2. Whether an on-duty deputy sheriff serving process is owed ordinary care in the maintenance of an apartment complex’s common areas (invitee-equivalent status) or only the limited duty owed to a licensee.

## Decision

- The appellate court reversed the summary judgment and remanded for further proceedings.
- The Fireman’s Rule did not bar the claim because the ice hazard was not the specific risk that occasioned Rivas’s presence to serve a subpoena.
- Rivas was owed a duty of ordinary care regarding the safety of common areas, similar to the duty owed to tenants and their guests.
- Whether defendants breached that duty and whether any breach caused the injury presented fact questions not suitable for summary judgment.

## Legal Principles

- The Fireman’s Rule is limited to injuries arising from the very hazards that public-safety officers are employed to confront and that bring them onto the premises; it does not categorically bar claims for unrelated premises defects.
- A law-enforcement officer entering property under legal authority for official duties may be treated as invitee-equivalent for premises-liability purposes, triggering a duty of ordinary care.
- Owners and managers of multi-unit residential properties have a duty of ordinary care to maintain common areas (including parking lots) in a reasonably safe condition and to address foreseeable hazards such as ice.

## Conclusion

The court held that an on-duty deputy sheriff injured by ice in an apartment parking lot was not barred by the Fireman’s Rule because the hazard was unrelated to the subpoena service, and that the property owner and manager owed ordinary care in maintaining common areas, requiring reversal of summary judgment.


Rivas v. Oxon Hill Joint Venture, 130 Md. App. 101, 744 A.2d 1076 (Md. Ct. Spec. App. 2000)