New Jersey court extends the ongoing storm rule to condo associations
New Jersey court extends the ongoing storm rule to condo associations
2026-09-15 · New Jersey · Courts
New Jersey condominium associations get the same protection from mid-storm slip-and-fall claims that commercial landowners do.
Glenn Weidlich v. 313-319 First Street Condo Association, Clinton Hill Condo Association, 357 8th Street Condominium Association, Joseph A. Del Forno, Inc., Del Forno Real Estate LLC, and Unlimited Building Management Corp., Docket A-3053-23, was argued April 29, 2025 and decided July 22, 2025. Unpublished, not precedential under R. 1:36-3.1
The duty, first
The panel restated the baseline without qualification: condominium associations "owe a statutory duty to their residents to maintain common areas pursuant to the Condominium Act… including paths and exterior stairs," citing Lechler v. 303 Sunset Avenue Condominium Association, 452 N.J. Super. 574 (App. Div. 2017).
That duty is not in doubt and this decision does not narrow it.
The ongoing storm rule
What the decision does is confirm that the rule from Pareja v. Princeton International Properties, 246 N.J. 546 (2021), applies to associations and their managers. Under Pareja, the duty to remove snow and ice does not attach while a storm is in progress; it attaches within a reasonable time after it ends.
There are two exceptions: where the defendant's conduct increased the risk, and where a pre-existing hazard caused the fall. The panel found neither supported by admissible proof.
The evidentiary point
The plaintiff's case failed on proof rather than on principle. Neither exception was "supported by admissible expert or lay proof" — which in practice means a plaintiff must tie a specific pre-existing defect to the specific location of the fall, not point to general deterioration of the stairs.
Why associations were not obviously covered
Pareja was a commercial landowner case. Its logic — that requiring snow removal during an active storm is inefficient and sometimes dangerous — applies just as naturally to a residential common area, but the extension was not automatic, and plaintiffs have argued that an association's statutory maintenance duty under the Condominium Act is different in kind from a commercial landowner's common-law duty.
Weidlich rejects that distinction on these facts. The statutory duty defines what must be maintained; Pareja defines when the obligation to act arises.
The defendants who were covered
Note the caption. The protection ran not only to the associations but to the management company and the contractor engaged for the work. For a New Jersey board, that is the practically important part: the association's snow contractor is not exposed on a theory the association itself would be protected from.
What the exceptions actually require
The two exceptions are where these cases are won and lost, and both are about the association's own conduct.
The increased-risk exception reaches a defendant who made conditions worse — the classic example being partial clearing that channels meltwater into a refreeze, or salting that produces a slick surface. An association that sends a contractor out mid-storm to do a partial job may create the exposure the rule would otherwise have spared it.
The pre-existing hazard exception reaches a defect that existed before the storm and caused the fall — a broken tread, a missing handrail, a step that ponds water. The plaintiff must connect that defect to the fall with admissible evidence, which usually means an expert.
The operational read for a board
Three things follow, and none of them is "do less."
Pre-existing defects in stairs, walkways and railings are the association's whole exposure, because they are the exception that survives a storm defence. A reserve study that flags deteriorating exterior stairs is, among other things, a liability document.
When a snow contract starts work relative to storm end matters, because a contract requiring mid-storm passes may be creating the increased-risk exposure. And contemporaneous records of storm timing and clearing times are what proves it — the rule turns on when the storm ended, and that is a question of fact the association will need evidence about, often years later.
What this is not
It is not a holding that associations have no winter liability. A fall the morning after a storm, on stairs the association had not cleared, is a different case entirely, and nothing here helps the association in it.
Related New Jersey HOA Topics
Stay on top of New Jersey HOA law
Every week: new New Jersey legislation, court rulings, and regulatory developments affecting condos, planned communities, and property managers. Free.
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.