Injured on Dangerous Apartment Stairs? Why the Law May Already Be on Your Side

I fell walking down the steps in my apartment building. The building is old and the steps bend around a sharp curve and are different length treads. There is also a loose mat on the stairs.  While I was walking down these steps on the narrow part of the treads, my foot slipped on the mat and I fell down the stairs. What claims do I have?

Most people who fall on a staircase assume the case comes down to their word against the landlord’s — whether the stairs were “really” dangerous, whether the owner was “really” careless. In a New York apartment building, that assumption is often wrong, and the difference matters enormously to the outcome of a case.

For many staircase injuries in multiple-unit residential buildings, New York has standards that describe what a safe staircase looks like. When a building owner ignores those requirements and someone gets hurt, the violation helps prove the negligence.

Two Kinds of Safety Rules — and Why the Difference Is Decisive

Not every safety rule carries the same legal weight, and this is the single most important thing to understand about these cases.

When a state statute imposes a specific safety duty and an owner violates it, that violation is negligence per se. The violation itself establishes negligence. (Most car accident cases involve one or more drivers violating a Vehicle and Traffic Law statute.)

The Law treats a local rule — a city ordinance or a provision of the New York City Administrative Code — differently. Violating one of those is only some evidence of negligence. The jury may weigh it alongside everything else, but it does not settle the question.

That distinction decides how strong a case is. A claim anchored to a state statute starts from a much stronger position than one resting only on a local code provision.

The Multiple Dwelling Law: A State Statute Built for These Cases

For apartment buildings in New York City, the key statute is the New York State Multiple Dwelling Law (MDL). Because many sections of the MDL impose specific duties, a violation is negligence per se — the powerful category above. (Some provisions of MDL are not specific, they are only general guidelines. Violation of general safety guidelines are not negligence per se. It depends upon which section of the MDL is violated whether it states a specific duty for the landlord.)

The MDL speaks directly to staircases. Section 52 requires that every interior stair in a covered building be kept in good repair and free from any encumbrance, and sets specific construction standards: treads and risers must be of uniform height and width within a single flight, treads must meet minimum dimensions, and winding stairs are prohibited. Multiple Dwelling Housing Law § 52(3-4).

Section 78 separately requires that every part of a multiple dwelling be kept in good repair, and places that responsibility squarely on the owner. The loose stair mat does not comply with this standard. This is not a specific safety standard, so the violation is not negligence per se. Multiple Dwelling Housing Law § 78. See Rivera v Nelson Realty, LLC, 7 NY3d 530, 825 NYS2d 422 (2006).

Administrative Code of the City of New York § 27-375(d) can apply as well to this case. The plaintiff must show the stairs were interior and used for egress. See Cusumano v City of New York, 63 AD3d 5 (2d Dept. 2009).

Multiple Residence Law

The Multiple Dwelling Law applies to cities with populations of 325,000 or more: New York City. In smaller cities, towns, and villages elsewhere in the state, a closely related statute, the Multiple Residence Law, imposes parallel duties. The principle is the same; the statute’s name changes with location.

How This Applies to Real Staircase Hazards

Consider two defects that frequently appear together in apartment-building falls — and that, in fact, our office sees in practice.

A curved staircase with uneven steps. When stairs bend around a curve, the steps are often cut so that the tread depth is not the same across the flight — wider at the outside of the curve, dangerously narrow toward the inside. A person’s foot expects each step to be the same depth as the last. When one isn’t, that’s how a fall happens. The Multiple Dwelling Law’s requirement that treads be of uniform width within a flight — and its prohibition on winding stairs — speaks directly to this hazard.

A mat laid over the steps but never secured to them can slide underfoot at exactly the wrong moment. The Multiple Dwelling Law addresses precisely this kind of condition.

A single fall can involve both defects at once — and each can support the case independently. Even where one theory faces an obstacle, the other may carry the claim.

Even a “Code-Compliant” Staircase Can Still Be Dangerous

Owners and their insurers sometimes argue that a staircase met the building code in effect when the building went up, and that the case should end there. New York law does not work that way. Complying with a code provision does not give an owner a free pass on the broader common-law duty to keep the property reasonably safe. A staircase can satisfy a code when it was built and still be a dangerous condition the owner knew about — or should have known about — and failed to fix. That common-law path to liability exists alongside the statute, not instead of it.

By James Santner, Esq.

If you have been injured in a fall on a dangerous staircase, you may be entitled to compensation. Contact Minchew & Santner, LLP for a free consultation to discuss your case. We serve clients throughout New York and New Jersey.