The essentials of a slip-and-fall premises liability case
Posted on October 3, 2015 in Premises Liability
Many New Yorkers have probably been in a store and seen a wet floor. It is a dangerous situation, and one that could result in serious injuries, requiring extensive medical care and causing lost wages as well as pain and suffering. But who is at fault in these situations? And can a New Yorker recover compensation if he or she is injured by a slippery surface?
First of all, it is possible that a store owner is responsible for a slip-and-fall accident and the company or the individual store owner may be held liable. However, there are many factors that must be satisfactorily shown in order to succeed on a premises liability claim. First, an individual must show that the defendant actually owned the property. Second, he or she must show that the injuries suffered were caused by an accident that resulted from a dangerous condition.
Determining what, exactly, is a “dangerous condition” can be tricky, but it usually requires showing that an unreasonable risk existed that an ordinary person would not have been aware of under the circumstances. A victim must then show that the defendant knew or should have known of the dangerous condition and failed to remedy it or warn customers. Showing knowledge could mean illustrating that the property owner created the dangerous condition, knew it existed but negligently failed to remedy it, or the dangerous condition existed for an extended period of time, so long that the property owner should have come to known of its existence.
This is merely the start of an examination of premises liability as it relates to slip-and-fall accidents. As one can see, the matter can be quite complex. Therefore, it may be wise of a victim to seek out information and help determining how the law applies to his or her specific situation.
Source: FindLaw, “Slip and Fall Accidents Overview,” accessed on Aug. 17, 2014
Source: FindLaw, “Slip and Fall Accidents Overview,” accessed on Aug. 17, 2014