The Colorado Supreme Court’s ruling in Jordan v. Panorama Orthopedics & Spine Center, PC, issued in 2015, clarified the definition of a "landowner" under Colorado’s Premises Liability Act (PLA). This case revolved around whether a commercial tenant could be held liable for injuries sustained in a common area of the property.
While leaving a medical appointment, Barbara Jordan tripped on an uneven sidewalk slab just outside the entrance of Panorama Orthopedics & Spine Center (Panorama), suffering a concussion and an orbital fracture. The fall occurred in an area designated as a shared space within the medical campus, leading Jordan to argue that Panorama, as the main tenant, bore responsibility for maintaining safe access points for its patients. Jordan filed a premises liability claim, arguing that Panorama, as the primary tenant of the medical campus, should be held responsible under the PLA.
Under Panorama’s lease agreement, the sidewalk where the incident occurred was classified as a "common area," which was under the landlord’s control and maintenance responsibility. Despite this, Jordan contended that Panorama’s role as the dominant tenant and its operational activities on the property made it a landowner under the PLA.
The case centered on the interpretation of "landowner" as defined in the PLA. The court examined:
After multiple legal proceedings, the Colorado Supreme Court affirmed the appellate court's decision, ruling that Panorama did not qualify as a landowner under the PLA. The court's findings reinforced the principle that tenants are not automatically liable for hazards in common areas unless they have direct control over those spaces. Key findings included:
Possession: The court determined that Panorama’s lease granted only non-exclusive use of the common areas, such as the sidewalk. Possession under the PLA requires intent to control the property, which was absent in this case as the landlord retained responsibility for maintenance.
Legal Responsibility: The court found that Panorama’s lease did not assign it legal responsibility for the condition of the sidewalk. Merely using a common area or notifying the landlord of maintenance issues does not establish legal responsibility under the PLA.
The court emphasized that liability under the PLA is limited to parties who either possess the property or are legally responsible for its condition. It concluded that Panorama did not meet either criterion.
Jordan v. Panorama Orthopedics & Spine Center set a legal precedent that further defines the obligations and limitations of commercial tenants in shared property spaces. The case underscored that businesses occupying leased premises must carefully assess their responsibilities under the Premises Liability Act (PLA) before assuming liability for incidents occurring in common areas. By affirming that tenants with non-exclusive use of common areas are not "landowners," the decision provides guidance for businesses operating in shared commercial spaces.
If you’ve been injured due to unsafe conditions on someone else’s property, you may have the right to seek compensation. Premises liability laws are designed to protect individuals from harm caused by negligent property maintenance. Whether your injury occurred in a common area of a business, rental property, or public space, understanding your legal options is crucial. At Whitcomb, Selinsky, PC, we represent individuals in premises liability cases and help them fight for the compensation they deserve. Contact us to discuss your case.