According to recent news reports, actor Larry Miller is expected to make a full recovery after suffering a traumatic brain injury after a fall last spring. Yahoo News/TV Guide and another news source (Eonline) have reported that Miller (who has appeared on Curb Your Enthusiasm, Seinfeld, Mad About You and Boston Legal) slipped and hit his head on a sidewalk just outside a Los Angeles bar on April 3, 2012.

 In a decision handed down on May 31st, the California First District Court of Appeals decided in favor of a customer who had slipped and fallen in a Safeway store, in spite of the fact the lower court had thrown the case out.  According to the Court's decision, the fact that the aisle where the accident happened may not have been inspected for a period of 20 minutes raised an inference there may have been negligence.  Even though the store had a custom and practice of regularly inspecting the sales floor, the facts of the case revealed this may not have been done for a period of 20 minutes before the customer fell, because of water from an unknown source on the floor.   The case had been dismissed on a motion by Safeway, essentially arguing that they had neither actual nor constructive knowledge of the water on the floor.  The appellate court reversed.

What this case demonstrates is something critically important under California premises liability law.  Before liability can be imposed on a business, in the case above a grocery store, it must be shown that the defendant had actual or constructive notice of the presence of a "dangerous condition", such as water on a tile floor.   The essence of a constructive notice claim is that the condition existed for such a length of time that it could and should have been discovered upon reasonable inspection.  What the court held in the case above was that the definition of reasonable inspection is nowhere precisely set forth in the law (either by statute or case law) so it should be left to the sound discretion of a jury to determine.  In short, this case is a reminder that the burden is often on the retailer or other business owner to prove a lack of notice.  The burden on the injured party is sometimes limited to showing the existence of the dangerous condition and that it was the cause or a contributing factor in the happening of an accident.

Compensation for the victims of slip and fall accidents, caused by a retailer's negligence in not regularly inspecting their sales floor, should be an important concern for all Californians. When a business patron is injured because regular and frequent measures were not taken by a business owner to keep the property safe, the owner should be held accountable and compensation paid to the victim.  An Orange County personal injury attorney with experience at handling such cases can make a fair assessment of these claims.  Mr. Ralph has more than 21 years of experience handling slip and fall cases, including just this type.   He can be reached at 714-919-4415 for a FREE CONSULTATION.

Have you or a family member been a victim of a slip and fall at a business that could have been prevented?

This posting should not be construed as legal advice or an opinion on the merit of any particular matter. A consultation is the best way to obtain an assessment of your potential case.

 

 

 Fortunately, not everyone has or will experience a slip or trip and fall accident in their lifetime.  However, this type of accident is becoming more and more common here in the United States as the average age of our population increases.  In fact, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, each year, one in every three adults age 65 and older falls.  These falls are often related to mobility issues common among the elderly, such as unstable or weak hips, knees or ankles.  However, when the neglect of a property or business owner causes or contributes to the happening of a fall, then the injured party should do all they reasonably can to protect their rights.  Absent taking certain, protective measures, a perfectly valid claim or lawsuit may be lost and the injured party may be denied some or all of the compensation they deserve.

The first thing to do when you are involved in any type of slip or trip and fall accident is to determine whether some artificial, dangerous condition played some role in the accident.  For example, if you were to take a fall in a retail store you would want to look at the floor to see if there is something on it (such as a liquid of some kind) that may have caused the fall.  If something dangerous is found, then steps should be taken to identify the source, if at all possible.  Identifying the source will likely aid in proving how long the condition existed and whether the store's employees knew or should have known of its existence.  The next thing to do is to document the scene of the accident with photographs, if at all possible.  Just about everyone carries a cell phone camera with them, and this would be the perfect time to put it to use.  Photographs of the condition causing the fall will likely go a long way to proving negligence, where it exists.  Next, a report (very short and concise) should be made to the property owner through their employees at or near the time of the accident.  If asked to write out an incident report narrative, careful attention should be paid to keeping the description of the accident as short and to the point as possible.  Finally, if there are any injuries sustained, medical attention should be sought and photographs take of any visible injuries.  If all of these steps are followed, then at a minimum the victim of a fall can rest assured they have done all they could to protect their rights, in the event they were harmed by some else's neglect.

Compensation for the victims of slip or trip and fall accidents, caused by a business owner's negligence, should be an important concern for all Californians.  When a business patron is injured because reasonable measures were not taken by a business owner to keep the property safe, the owner should be held accountable and compensation paid to the victim.   An Orange County injury attorney with experience at handling such cases can make a fair assessment of these claims.  Mr. Ralph has more than 20 years of experience handling personal injury cases, including just this type.  He can be reached at 714-919-4415 for a FREE CONSULTATION.

Have you or a family member been a victim of a slip or trip and fall that could have been prevented?

This posting should not be construed as legal advice or an opinion on the merit of any particular matter. A consultation is the best way to obtain an assessment of your potential case.

 

Earlier this week a California appellate court decided a case in which the issue of liability of a restaurant was called into question based on an alleged failure to act within one minute of a danger being created.  In August of  2007, a boy vomited on a floor in the common area of a shopping center, 15 feet from the entrance to the restaurant.  Less than one minute later, the plaintiffs slipped in the spill and fell.  Restaurant employees immediately began taking measures to clean up the spill.  One employee stationed near the front of the restaurant radioed management to inform them of the spill and then began walking toward it.  The employee was somewhere between the front of the restaurant and the spill when the plaintiffs slipped, perhaps as close as two or three feet from them at the time of their fall.  There was no evidence the employee noticed plaintiffs or had enough time to warn them.  The assistant general manager arrived on the scene about 30 seconds after receiving the radio call, but the victims were already on the ground.  After the slip and fall, restaurant employees cleaned up the spill with paper towels.

The appellate court, in affirming the trial court's decision against the plaintiffs, concluded that the law gives a landowner reasonable time to remedy or warn against the dangerous condition once it has been discovered. The court also acknowledged that  negligence in slip-and-fall cases is founded upon the defendant's failure to exercise ordinary care in remedying the defect after he has discovered it.  Many cases involve the question of whether a dangerous  condition has existed long enough for a reasonably prudent person to have discovered it, and that is often a question of fact for the jury to decide.  However, in the case above the court concluded that the defendant (restaurant) had actual knowledge of the spill immediately, and that the accident occurred less than a minute after the spill. According to the court, as a matter of law and based on the undisputed facts, the one minute was not enough time to remedy or warn the plaintiffs of the danger.  In reaching this decision, the appellate court relied on a 60 year-old decision in which is was determined that a one and a half minute delay in remedying a dangerous condition (a banana peel on a supermarket floor) was insufficient for the market to be held liable.  Girvetz v. Boys' Market, Inc. (1949) 91 Cal. App. 2d 827.

While the decision rendered this week by the Court of Appeals is not binding (since it was unpublished), it did make clear that trial courts are likely to follow the Girvetz case as it applies to the issue of timing.  In short, an injured plaintiff must be able to show the dangerous condition existed for more than just a minute in most circumstances.  In the majority of cases, the precise time at which a danger is created is unknown, and its length of existence must be proven by inference.  In light of the decision above, and Girvetz, if the defense can show the danger existed for roughly one minute before an accident it is unlikely a court will even allow the case to be decided by a jury and will instead render its own judgment for the defendant.

Compensation for the victims of fall accidents, caused by another’s negligence, should be an important concern for all Californians.  When a trip and fall occurs on someone else’s property because of the owner’s negligence, the owner  should be held accountable.  An Orange County injury lawyer with experience at handling such cases can make a fair assessment of these claims.  Mr. Ralph has more than 19 years of experience handling personal injury cases, including just this type.  He can be reached at 714-919-4415 for a FREE CONSULTATION.

Do you believe the "one minute rule" is fair?

• Nothing in this post is intended to suggest the Law Offices of Paul W. Ralph currently represents anyone involved in the news story above.  This posting should not be construed as legal advice or an opinion on the merit of any particular matter.  A consultation is the best way to obtain an assessment of your potential case.

Every year many people suffer severe injuries from slip/trip and fall accidents.  Often, wet floors, changes in elevation, faulty and absent warnings and flawed walkways make people victims of slip and trip and fall accidents.  Assuming the fall happened on property owned or controlled by another, the law generally allows the injured party to recover compensation for injuries and damages caused by neglect.  For example, when a business owner chooses to construct a speed bump within a parking lot where patrons are known to walk, the bump must be distinguished from the surrounding pavement.  Most commonly, the bump is painted a bright, solid color or at least striped with paint in order to warn patrons of its presence.

In a recent case, a woman was traversing a parking lot near the entrance to a laundromat when she was caused to fall by an unpainted, unstriped speed bump.  Because of the property owner's neglect, the paint on the surface of the bump had been allowed to fade and completely disappear in most places.  The victim sustained serious injuries including a broken nose, loose teeth and fluid in her knee requiring extensive medical treatment.  Not 100 feet away and within the same parking lot, another speed bump was in fact better maintained and white stripes remained intact across its surface.

Should the property owner be held liable for the failure to warn?