3.9-34 Duty to Remove Snow and Ice – Ongoing Storm
New September 28, 2012
Under our law, [in the absence of unusual circumstances,] if the defendant had control over the premises, (he/she/it) is permitted to wait until the end of a storm and is given a reasonable time thereafter to remove ice and snow from
<describe location of the fall>. This rule does not prevent you, the jury, from considering whether a storm has ended or whether the plaintiff’s fall and injuries resulted from new
<describe precipitation> or old <describe precipitation>. [The rule also permits you to consider whether there were unusual circumstances present which would make the defendant responsible for removing snow and ice from
<describe location of the fall> outside walks and steps even if a storm has not ended.
There has been evidence presented in this case that
<describe unusual circumstances present in the case>. If you find from the evidence that such circumstances existed at the time of the plaintiff’s fall, you may find that the defendant breached (his/her/its) duty to maintain the premises under those circumstances. [<insert if applicable:> Your consideration of these issues will require you to answer interrogatories,1 which I will explain to you later in these instructions.]]
Gazo v. Stamford, 255 Conn. 245 (2001);
Kraus v. Newton, 211 Conn. 191 (1989); Umsteadt v. G. R. Realty, 123 Conn. App. 73 (2010);
Cooks v. O’Brien Properties, Inc., 48 Conn. App. 339, 342 n.3 (1998);
Sinert v. Olympia & York Development Co., 38 Conn. App. 844, 848-49, cert. denied, 235 Conn. 927 (1995).