{
  "id": 1888409,
  "name": "Jeannie GLASGOW v. CENTURY PROPERTY FUND XIX",
  "name_abbreviation": "Glasgow v. Century Property Fund XIX",
  "decision_date": "1989-06-19",
  "docket_number": "89-112",
  "first_page": "221",
  "last_page": "223",
  "citations": [
    {
      "type": "official",
      "cite": "299 Ark. 221"
    },
    {
      "type": "parallel",
      "cite": "772 S.W.2d 312"
    }
  ],
  "court": {
    "name_abbreviation": "Ark.",
    "id": 8808,
    "name": "Arkansas Supreme Court"
  },
  "jurisdiction": {
    "id": 34,
    "name_long": "Arkansas",
    "name": "Ark."
  },
  "cites_to": [
    {
      "cite": "246 Ark. 528",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "Ark.",
      "case_ids": [
        1604182
      ],
      "weight": 2,
      "year": 1969,
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/ark/246/0528-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "289 Ark. 507",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "Ark.",
      "case_ids": [
        1875314
      ],
      "weight": 2,
      "year": 1986,
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/ark/289/0507-01"
      ]
    }
  ],
  "analysis": {
    "cardinality": 241,
    "char_count": 2853,
    "ocr_confidence": 0.903,
    "pagerank": {
      "raw": 1.410388012102757e-07,
      "percentile": 0.6468352015889729
    },
    "sha256": "dc238c6808d1b0eb6903090d07fb69cf59f9da39be27ff728c129f7154ea4f48",
    "simhash": "1:933c5acb4a8ff71f",
    "word_count": 499
  },
  "last_updated": "2023-07-14T21:11:40.326030+00:00",
  "provenance": {
    "date_added": "2019-08-29",
    "source": "Harvard",
    "batch": "2018"
  },
  "casebody": {
    "judges": [],
    "parties": [
      "Jeannie GLASGOW v. CENTURY PROPERTY FUND XIX"
    ],
    "opinions": [
      {
        "text": "David Newbern, Justice.\nJeannie Glasgow, the appellant, slipped, fell, and was injured on a snow-covered walkway at an apartment complex, owned by the appellee, Century Property Fund XIX (Century), where Ms. Glasgow was a tenant. She sued Century claiming her injury was caused by Century\u2019s failure to close the hot tub area at the apartment complex while the snow was on the ground. The trial court granted Century\u2019s summary judgment motion. The sole issue is whether Century, by virtue of its lease with Ms. Glasgow, had a duty to close the hot tub. We agree with the trial court\u2019s decision that it undertook no such duty, and thus we affirm.\nA tenant is not an invitee on her landlord\u2019s premises but has a right equal to that of the landlord to exclusive possession of the property. See Knox v. Gray, 289 Ark. 507, 712 S.W.2d 914 (1986). In Kilbury v. McConnell, 246 Ark. 528, 438 S.W.2d 692 (1969), we adopted the Massachusetts rule to the effect that a landlord has no duty to a tenant to remove common hazards such as ice or snow from the parts of the premises in common use by tenants. We noted there that there was \u201cno evidence in the case ... of any agreement or assumption of duty that removes\u201d the landlord from the general rule. Thus, if Century had any duty toward Ms. Glasgow in these circumstances, it must have been spelled out in the lease.\nThe provision in the lease on which Ms. Glasgow relies states that the tenant will abide by written rules incorporated into the lease. The document entitled \u201cApartment House Rules\u201d provided in its opening paragraph that the rules are for the tenants\u2019 protection, and \u201c[m]anagement reserves the right to take whatever steps may be necessary to enforce\u201d the rules. Rule 9, entitled \u201cPool Rules\u201d provided:\nSwimming pool hours and rules are posted in the immediate pool area. These rules must be observed for the safety of all tenants and guests. Children may swim only when accompanied by an adult, and only between the hours of 10:00 a.m. to 12:00 noon. No more than two guests per apartment are allowed in the pool area, and they must be accompanied by the tenant they are visiting.\nNothing in the cited rules mentions the hot tub area. Even if we could assume the hot tub was in the vicinity of the swimming pool, the rules do not require Century to close the pool area when the weather is inclement.\nThe trial judge was correct; because Century had undertaken no duty to Ms. Glasgow to close the hot tub there could be no remaining genuine issue of material fact to be tried. Ark. R. Civ. P. 56. Thus, summary judgment was appropriate.\nAffirmed.",
        "type": "majority",
        "author": "David Newbern, Justice."
      }
    ],
    "attorneys": [
      "Dodds, Kidd, Ryan & Moore, by. Donald S. Ryan, for appellant.",
      "Barber, McCaskill, Amsler, Jones & Hale, P.A., for appellee."
    ],
    "corrections": "",
    "head_matter": "Jeannie GLASGOW v. CENTURY PROPERTY FUND XIX\n89-112\n772 S.W.2d 312\nSupreme Court of Arkansas\nOpinion delivered June 19, 1989\nDodds, Kidd, Ryan & Moore, by. Donald S. Ryan, for appellant.\nBarber, McCaskill, Amsler, Jones & Hale, P.A., for appellee."
  },
  "file_name": "0221-01",
  "first_page_order": 245,
  "last_page_order": 247
}