Case Information The names of the Judges presiding over the case of Martinez V. Blake are Don J. Kiley, Kent E. Cattani, and D. Steven Williams. The attorneys representing the appellants, Stacy and Edward Martinez, are John Musacchio and Marc A. Kamin with the law firm Goldberg and Osborn. The attorneys representing the appellant, Hurbert Scott Blake, are Shane P. Dyet and Andres Challoga. This oral argument occurred on March 21, 2024, captioned Martines V. Blake.
Case Summary The general argument being heard in this case is that a landlord has a duty to a tenant to inspect and ensure the safety of a property before and during their occupancy. The main argument presented by the appellants’…show more content… In a rebuttal to the idea that a landlord must maintain the property, he states that Mr. Blake did go through measures to ensure the property was ready to be occupied. He goes on further to talk about how after making these inspections he can only be liable for missing something if a reasonable person can believe that the property requires repair and must be fixed. He challenges the plaintiff by stating in Mrs. Martinez’s testimony, she had walked on such steps as they moved in with no issue, further conveying that missing the issue with these steps during an inspection could reasonably happen. He concludes these issues by stating that after the Martinez’s were moved in, he would need a notice from a reasonable person to fix the steps which Mr. Blake did not receive, leading to the steps never being fixed. The Judges also bring up the fact that this should lead to a jury deciding the outcome of the case, which attorney Andres shut down by bringing up the lack of evidence the appellants have showing negligence from the…show more content… This leaves the question of whether it is reasonable for the landlord to inspect all aspects of the property as the tenants renew their lease every month. Answered by the attorney, stated that the landlord was on the property consistently and he should have noticed the problem with the step. I believe this answer hurt the attorneys’ case Mr. Blake, the landlord, was on the property upkeep multiple different things showing he did not have negligence towards the property and did not find a reasonable issue to fix the step. Taking the liability away from the
