A July 2026 appellate ruling out of New York’s Fourth Department has sent ripples through the premises liability community, clarifying a long-murky area of law: when a religious institution owns property leased to a healthcare entity, who bears responsibility when a visitor slips on ice? The decision in Polisoto v. St. Gregory The Great Roman Catholic Church (July 2026) directly tackles the religious institution slip and fall liability appellate ruling question that courts have dodged for years, and its implications extend well beyond Western New York.
The Polisoto Ruling: What the Fourth Department Actually Decided
The facts of Polisoto are straightforward enough: a visitor slipped and fell on ice at a property owned by St. Gregory The Great Roman Catholic Church but actively operated by Kaleida Health, a healthcare entity leasing the premises. A landscaping company was also responsible for parking lot maintenance, adding a third layer to the liability question. The injured party sued the relevant parties, and St. Gregory argued it had surrendered operational control to its tenant. Kaleida argued the property owner retained a non-delegable duty to maintain safe conditions. The Fourth Department’s July 2026 ruling rejected the notion that a religious institution can fully insulate itself from liability simply by executing a lease agreement with an operational tenant.
The court’s analysis centered on two questions: whether St. Gregory retained sufficient control over the premises to owe a duty of care, and whether the lease agreement shifted snow and ice removal obligations clearly enough to transfer liability entirely. The Fourth Department found that ambiguous lease language regarding exterior maintenance, combined with the church’s continued ownership interest, was enough to keep St. Gregory in the liability pool alongside Kaleida. This religious institution slip and fall liability appellate ruling marks a significant doctrinal development because it directly addresses the gap created when faith-based organizations act as passive landlords to institutional tenants.
For a broader understanding of how New York courts apportion fault in multi-party premises cases, Cornell Law School’s Legal Information Institute provides a comprehensive overview of comparative negligence doctrine, which governs how liability percentages are assigned to each defendant.
How Courts Divide Liability Between Property Owners and Lessees in 2026
The framework courts use to split negligence between a landlord and a commercial or institutional tenant has several key pillars, all of which the Polisoto court examined carefully. Understanding these pillars is essential for anyone evaluating a multi-party slip and fall claim. In 2026, slip and fall claims account for roughly 12% of all personal injury cases filed in state courts, making this framework more relevant than ever for property owners, tenants, and injured parties alike.
Control of the Premises
The single most important factor is who exercised day-to-day control over the area where the fall occurred. A property owner who delegates all maintenance responsibilities to a lessee in a well-drafted lease can shift a substantial share of liability. However, courts look past the written agreement to actual conduct. If St. Gregory’s facilities staff periodically cleared the parking lot or if church leadership directed the landscaping company’s snow removal schedule, those facts would weigh heavily toward keeping the church in the liability picture regardless of what the lease said on paper.
Lease Language and the Snow-and-Ice Obligation
Snow and ice removal duties are among the most litigated lease provisions in cold-weather states. In 2026, New York courts continue to require that lease language expressly and unambiguously transfer exterior maintenance obligations to a tenant before a court will relieve the property owner of liability. Vague provisions stating that the tenant is responsible for “general upkeep” rarely satisfy this standard. The Polisoto ruling reinforces that boilerplate lease language will not shield a religious institution from premises liability when a visitor is seriously injured on ice.
The Natural Accumulation Defense and Its Limits
New York recognizes a natural accumulation defense, which generally holds that a property owner is not liable for injuries caused by snow or ice that accumulated naturally without any human interference. However, this defense has significant limits. Once a property owner or its contractor begins removing snow or ice and does so negligently — leaving uneven patches, failing to treat refreezing conditions, or clearing only part of a walkway — the natural accumulation defense evaporates. Given that a landscaping company was responsible for parking lot maintenance in Polisoto, questions about whether that contractor’s work created or worsened the hazardous condition were central to the litigation.
Settlement Values in Multi-Party Religious and Healthcare Slip and Fall Cases
Understanding what these cases are worth requires looking at both the macro picture and the specific variables that drive value up or down. According to 2026 industry data, the average slip and fall settlement is approximately $30,000, with most cases falling between $10,000 and $50,000. Cases involving serious injuries, multiple defendants with insurance coverage, or compelling liability facts can push well above that range.
The backdrop for these figures is sobering. The National Safety Council reports that falls killed 48,308 Americans in 2024 and sent 8.8 million people to emergency rooms. Falls generate approximately $70 billion in medical expenses and workers’ compensation payouts annually across the United States. These numbers underscore why slip and fall litigation remains a high-stakes area of personal injury law and why defendants — including religious institutions and their healthcare tenants — carry substantial insurance programs to manage exposure.
In multi-party cases like Polisoto, settlement values are shaped by several distinct factors:
- Severity and permanence of injury. Traumatic brain injuries, spinal fractures, and hip fractures in older adults consistently produce the highest settlements. A simple sprain with full recovery will settle for a fraction of what a case involving permanent disability commands.
- Number of insured defendants. When a property owner, a healthcare tenant, and a landscaping contractor are all named, injured plaintiffs gain access to multiple insurance policies. The combined coverage can dramatically increase the pool of available funds.
- Clarity of liability. Cases where security camera footage, maintenance logs, or prior incident reports demonstrate that the defendants knew about a hazardous condition and failed to act tend to settle at the higher end of the range.
- Comparative fault of the plaintiff. New York’s pure comparative negligence rule means a plaintiff’s recovery is reduced by their percentage of fault, but they can still recover even if they were primarily at fault. Defendants frequently argue that a plaintiff was not paying attention, was wearing inappropriate footwear, or ignored visible ice warnings.
When all three parties — the church, the healthcare tenant, and the landscaping contractor — are insured and liability is reasonably clear, settlements in cases involving serious orthopedic injuries can reach six figures or more. Cases involving catastrophic injuries with permanent impairment have settled and gone to verdict at significantly higher amounts.
What Property-Owning Religious Institutions Must Do Now
The Polisoto ruling is a wake-up call for every religious institution in New York that owns property leased to a commercial, healthcare, or institutional tenant. The following steps represent current best practices for managing exposure in 2026.
Lease Revision and Specificity
Any lease governing a property where third parties may be present should contain explicit, unambiguous language addressing snow removal, ice treatment, parking lot maintenance, and the identity of any third-party contractor hired to perform those services. The lease should specify who bears the cost of that contractor, who supervises the work, and who is responsible for verifying that the work was performed adequately after each weather event. General maintenance clauses will not protect a property-owning church after Polisoto.
Shared Maintenance Logs and Communication Protocols
Courts look at actual conduct, not just written agreements. Religious institutions that lease their properties should establish shared digital maintenance logs that record every snow removal event, ice treatment application, and inspection of exterior surfaces. These logs should be accessible to both the property owner and the tenant, and they should be time-stamped and signed by the individual who performed or verified the work. In a multi-party case, these records become critical evidence of who was actually controlling the premises on the day of a fall.
Insurance Review
Religious institutions acting as landlords should require their tenants to carry general liability insurance naming the institution as an additional insured, with coverage limits adequate to the nature of the tenancy. Healthcare entities routinely operate with substantial liability programs, but the institution’s own coverage should not be treated as a backstop for tenant negligence. A post-Polisoto insurance review should examine whether the institution’s current policy adequately covers premises liability claims arising from leased portions of its property.
Implications for Injured Visitors in 2026
For individuals who have been injured in a slip and fall at a religiously owned property — whether it is actively used as a place of worship or leased to a healthcare or commercial tenant — the Polisoto ruling strengthens the legal landscape in several important ways.
First, it confirms that injured visitors need not accept a religious institution’s assertion that it bears no responsibility because it leased the property to someone else. Courts will examine the actual facts of control, and ambiguous lease language will work in the injured party’s favor. Second, the ruling reinforces the importance of identifying and naming all potentially liable parties early in the litigation. A claim against only the healthcare tenant might leave significant insurance coverage on the table if the church’s own policy is not accessed. Third, cases involving a third-party landscaping or maintenance contractor add another layer of potential recovery, since the contractor’s negligent performance of snow removal can independently support a claim.
Anyone injured in a slip and fall on ice at a church-owned property in 2026 should take several immediate steps to protect their claim. Document the scene with photographs and video before conditions change. Identify any witnesses and obtain their contact information. Report the incident to both the property owner and the tenant if possible, and preserve that communication. Seek medical attention immediately, both for your health and to create a contemporaneous record of your injuries. And consult with a premises liability attorney before speaking with any insurance adjuster representing the defendants.
Given that falls send nearly 9 million Americans to emergency rooms each year and generate tens of billions of dollars in medical costs, the legal system’s response — through rulings like Polisoto — reflects a clear policy judgment that property owners cannot use lease agreements as a costless mechanism to avoid accountability for dangerous conditions on their land.
Frequently Asked Questions
Can a religious institution be held liable for a slip and fall even if it leases the property to a healthcare company?
Yes. The Polisoto ruling makes clear that executing a lease agreement does not automatically transfer all premises liability from a property-owning religious institution to its tenant. Courts examine whether the institution retained actual or constructive control over the area where the fall occurred, and whether the lease language clearly and unambiguously transferred maintenance obligations. If either element is missing, the church can remain in the liability pool alongside its tenant.
What is the “natural accumulation” defense and does it protect churches from ice slip and fall claims?
The natural accumulation defense holds that a property owner is not liable for injuries caused by snow or ice that accumulated naturally and was not disturbed by human activity. However, this defense is lost once the owner, tenant, or their contractor begins snow or ice removal and performs that work negligently. In cases where a landscaping company has been hired to maintain the parking lot, the natural accumulation defense is often unavailable because the contractor’s partial or inadequate work is treated as an affirmative act that created or worsened the hazard.
How are damages divided between a religious institution and a healthcare tenant in a multi-party slip and fall case?
New York uses a pure comparative negligence system, which means a jury assigns a percentage of fault to each defendant based on their relative contribution to the dangerous condition. Each defendant then pays damages proportional to their share of fault. In cases involving a property owner, an institutional tenant, and a third-party maintenance contractor, fault can be distributed across all three parties. An injured plaintiff recovers from each defendant according to that defendant’s assigned percentage, subject to New York’s rules on joint and several liability.
What types of injuries in religious institution slip and fall cases result in the highest settlements?
Traumatic brain injuries, hip fractures, spinal injuries, and complex orthopedic injuries involving surgery and extended rehabilitation consistently produce the highest settlement values. While 2026 industry data places the average slip and fall settlement at approximately $30,000, cases involving permanent disability, ongoing medical treatment, or significant lost wages can reach six figures or more, particularly when multiple insured defendants are involved and liability is clearly established.
What should I do immediately after slipping on ice at a church or religiously owned property?
Document the scene immediately with photographs and video, capturing the exact location of the fall, the ice or snow conditions, and any absence of warning signs or sand or salt treatment. Identify witnesses and collect their contact information. Report the incident to both the property owner and the tenant in writing if possible. Seek emergency medical care promptly to protect your health and create a contemporaneous record of your injuries. Preserve all medical records, bills, and correspondence. Contact a premises liability attorney before providing any recorded statement to an insurance adjuster representing the property owner, tenant, or landscaping contractor.
Sarah Anderson is a Premises Liability Specialist with extensive knowledge of personal injury law and settlement values across the United States. With years of experience analyzing slip and fall injuries only cases, Sarah helps injury victims understand their legal rights and the potential value of their claims. Sarah is not an attorney and the information provided is for educational purposes only.