Trip and Fall Resulting in Injury

Incident Overview

An investment group purchased a compound of multiple commercial buildings in 2016. The property featured primarily office space and retail space that were leased to local businesses. Each building included a wrap-around wood deck structure and stairs that provided access to sidewalks throughout the property. During 2017, a customer was attempting to access a retail space at the first level of one building when they tripped over the stair nosing at the exterior wood-framed stair, which resulted in the detachment of the nosing from the stair. As a result, the customer sustained substantial injuries and later filed a lawsuit against the property owner, alleging that the stair was non-compliant with the building code.

The customer’s fall raised questions about whether the stair was deficient with respect to the current building code and if the code required its modification. To complicate matters, given the recent nature of the property purchase, if a deficiency was discovered that required mitigation, it was important to determine who was responsible for identifying the condition and completing the work.

Envista’s Investigation

Envista was retained to inspect the property, review historical documentation and testimony, and determine whether the fall resulted from a deficiency, if the mitigation of the condition was required by the code, and, if so, to determine who was required to perform the mitigation.

Our team’s analysis required expertise in multiple building codes, their applicability to this condition, and mechanisms that would trigger its required compliance. Specifically, our review required in-depth knowledge of the following:

• The International Building Code
• The International Existing Building Code
• The International Property Maintenance Code
• The Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA)

Our findings revealed that while the stair geometry did not conform with the requirements of the current building code for new structures, state regulations did not require modifications or corrective measures. These modifications would not be triggered unless specific criteria were reached, such as a structural modification or change in occupancy, which had not occurred since the current owner’s purchase, effectively ‘grandfathering’ the condition.

Outcome & Impact

Based on Envista’s expert analysis, the property owner was found not liable for the incident, as they were not legally required to update or modify the stairs before the fall occurred.

Additionally, shortly after Envista’s inspection, the property owner initiated a capital investment campaign to resurface multiple decks and conduct routine maintenance. Due to our insights, the owner incorporated minor modifications to reduce the risk for future patrons, proactively limiting liability exposure for similar claims.