Tag: premises liability

How Non-Delegable Duties Affect Premises Liability Cases

How Non-Delegable Duties Affect Premises Liability Cases

Premises liability is a legal concept that states property owners are responsible for maintaining safe conditions on their property. If a property owner fails to fulfill this legal obligation, he could be held liable for any injuries that are sustained on his property as a result of hazardous conditions. However, some property owners try to place the blame for an accident on a third party. When this happens, the “non-delegable duties” legal concept often comes into play. Here’s what you should know about this legal term:

What Are Non-Delegable Duties?

Property owners often claim they delegated the duties of maintaining safe conditions on the property to a third party. Therefore, if an accident occurs, the third party is liable for the victim’s injuries, not the property owner. But, it’s important to understand that this defense strategy will not hold up in court.

Property maintenance and security issues are classified as non-delegable duties. This means a property owner cannot transfer liability for an accident related to maintenance or security to a third party.

An Example of Non-Delegable Duties

Many property owners hire landscaping companies to maintain the landscaping on their property. If someone trips over a tree stump hidden in the grass and breaks their arm, the property owner may tell the victim that it’s the landscaping company’s fault. However, the landscaping company cannot be held liable for the victim’s injuries. Even though the property owner hired the landscaping company to take care of the landscaping, property maintenance is a non-delegable duty. This means regardless of who is hired to help with this duty, the liability still falls on the property owner if an accident occurs.

The victim’s premises liability claim would still be filed against the property owner, who may be ordered to compensate the victim for his injuries. However, the property owner could seek reimbursement from the landscaping company that was hired to maintain the property. If the property owner chooses to do this, the case would be completely separate from the victim’s premises liability claim. The victim would not be involved in the property owner’s efforts to seek reimbursement.

If you have been injured on someone else’s property, contact Reisch Law Firm as soon as possible. Proving liability in these cases can be challenging, which is why it’s important to seek help from our experienced personal injury attorneys. Schedule a free consultation today by calling 303-291-0555 or filling out this online form.

How to Tell if You Have A Slip and Fall Claim

How to Tell if You Have A Slip and Fall Claim

One of the first thoughts that may cross your mind after a slip and fall accident is filing a personal injury claim to recover compensation for your injuries. Many slip and fall victims successfully recover compensation for their medical expenses, lost wages, and pain and suffering. But, this does not mean that every person who slips and falls will automatically be compensated. Here’s how you can tell if you have a valid slip and fall claim:

You Were Not to Blame

Were you partially or totally responsible for the accident? In Colorado, personal injury victims can recover compensation as long as they were not more than 50% responsible for the accident. A slip and fall plaintiff who was illegally on the property at the time of the accident may hold more than 50% of the blame, which means she will not be able to recover compensation. It’s best to talk to an attorney about the role that you could have played in the accident to determine if it will affect your ability to recover compensation.

The Property Owner Was Negligent

Property owners are often held liable for slip and fall accidents due to premises liability laws. These laws state a property owner must maintain safe conditions on his property to protect his guests from harm. Therefore, if a slip and fall accident occurs because of an unsafe condition on someone’s property, the owner can often be held liable.

However, the victim must be able to prove that the property owner’s failure to maintain safe conditions was negligent. To do this, the plaintiff must prove one of these conditions is true:

  • The owner created the safety hazard that caused the accident.
  • The owner knew about the safety hazard that caused the accident, but did nothing to fix it.
  • The owner should have known about the safety hazard because a “reasonable” property owner would have.

The first two conditions are straightforward, and can typically be proven through surveillance camera footage, witness testimony, and other evidence. But, proving that an owner should have known about a condition can be a bit more complex. This is typically proven by showing the hazard existed for a long period of time or was located in a place that should have made it obvious to the property owner. If an attorney believes it is possible to prove the property owner is liable, then you may have a valid slip and fall claim.

If you have been injured in a slip and fall accident, contact Reisch Law Firm today. Our personal injury attorneys will conduct a thorough investigation of the accident to gather the evidence we need to prove liability. Schedule a free consultation today by calling 303-291-0555 or filling out this online form.

Who is Liable For Trampoline Park Injuries?

Who is Liable For Trampoline Park Injuries?

Trampoline park injuries are on the rise, according to a new study published in Pediatrics. Researchers found that the number of children who had to go to the emergency room due to a trampoline park injury rose from under 600 in 2010 to nearly 7,000 in 2014. Some children suffer minor injuries such as ankle sprains, but others sustain far more serious injuries, including fractures, spinal cord damage, and head trauma. If your child is injured at a trampoline park, it’s important to know who you can hold liable for his injuries.

The Trampoline Park Owner

Property owners have a legal obligation under premises liability laws to keep their properties safe so guests do not injure themselves. Therefore, if a child is injured while at a trampoline park, the property owner could be held liable.

Property owners are typically held liable for trampoline injuries if the injuries occurred as a result of poorly maintained equipment. For example, an owner can be held liable if a child injuries himself on an old trampoline that clearly needed to be repaired. The owner’s failure to repair the trampoline would most likely be seen as negligence, which is why he would be liable.

If a child is injured because he was not being supervised, a property owner can also be held liable. For instance, let’s say the trampoline park employees are supposed to closely supervise small children, but fail to do so. If a child who is supposed to be under supervision injures himself, the trampoline park owner can be held responsible.

The Manufacturer of the Trampoline Park

Manufacturers must ensure the trampolines they produce and sell to trampoline parks are safe. If an injury occurs due to a defective trampoline, the manufacturer can be held liable for the victim’s injuries. For example, if the part that is designed to attach the trampoline mat to the frame is defective, the mat may detach while a child is jumping on it. This can lead to serious injuries, and the manufacturer would be liable for producing a defective product.

A Trampoline Park Guest

In some cases, another guest at the trampoline park could be held liable for the child’s injuries. This occurs when the child’s injury is a direct result of another guest’s negligence. For instance, a guest can be held liable if he intentionally pushes a child off of a trampoline and the child breaks his ankle.

Has your child been injured at a trampoline park? If so, contact Reisch Law Firm today. Our personal injury attorneys will immediately get to work to identify the liable parties so we can recover compensation on behalf of your child. Schedule a free consultation today by calling 303-291-0555 or filling out this online form.

Inadequate Security and Premises Liability Laws

Inadequate Security and Premises Liability Laws

No one should have to fear for their safety while on someone else’s commercial or residential property. But unfortunately, many people are assaulted due to inadequate security at another person’s property. If you’re injured in this type of accident, who is liable for your injuries? Here’s what you need to know about inadequate security and premises liability laws:

What is Premises Liability?

Premises liability laws state that a property owner must maintain safe conditions on his property in order to ensure that visitors are not hurt. If he fails to do so and a visitor is hurt as a result, he can be held liable for the victim’s injuries.

What is Adequate Security?

What is adequate for one property is not necessarily adequate for another, which is why this is determined on a case-by-case basis. In general, property owners can provide security to guests in the form of trained security officers, security cameras, and adequate lighting.

When Do Property Owners Need to Provide Security?

Whether or not a property owner should have provided security will be determined on a case-by-case basis. Some property owners have a greater duty to provide security to visitors than others. For example, the owner of a shopping center may have a duty to protect his customers by providing security inside and outside of the stores. But, a woman who lives in an apartment complex does not have a duty to provide security to her guests in the parking lot outside of the building.

Property owners should also provide security when there has been a history of criminal activity on the property.

When Can Victims Recover Compensation?

Victims can only recover compensation when they can prove that the property owner’s failure to provide adequate security was negligent. To prove this, the victim must show that the property owner either knew or should have known about the security issue, but did nothing to fix it.

For example, let’s say a property owner or one of his employees had to call the cops multiple times within the last few weeks to report crimes in the business’s parking lot. Even though the property owner knew criminal activity was taking place in the parking lot, he failed to provide adequate security to his customers. In this case, the property owner would be liable because he was aware of the risk and did not take action to keep his customers safe.

If you have been injured due to lack of security on another person’s property, contact Reisch Law Firm today. Our experienced personal injury attorneys will immediately begin to gather evidence that we need to hold the property owner accountable for your injuries. Schedule a free consultation today by calling 303-291-0555 or filling out this online form.

Inadequate Lighting and Slip and Falls

Inadequate Lighting and Slip and Falls

A fall that occurs on someone else’s property is known as a slip and fall accident, and in many cases the property owner can be held liable for any injuries sustained in this type of accident. Many slip and fall accidents are caused by wet floors, defective stairs, or torn carpeting. But, one of the lesser known causes of these accidents is inadequate lighting. Here’s what you need to know about inadequate lighting and slip and falls:

What is Inadequate Lighting?

Inadequate lighting conditions exist when the areas of a property that visitors are often on are not clearly lit at night. Sometimes, this is a result of a poor design. For instance, a parking lot may not have been designed with enough lights to light the entire area. It could also be a result of a failure to maintain the property if the problem is that the light bulbs have not been replaced or repaired.

How Inadequate Lighting Leads to Slip and Falls

If a person cannot see clearly, it is incredibly difficult to avoid hazards that may be in their path. For example, a person walking through a parking lot will need adequate lighting in order to know where the sidewalk ends or where parking lot curbs are located. Without lighting, he may run into a curb or take a tumble off of the edge of the sidewalk.

When is the Property Owner Liable?

The premises liability law states that property owners must maintain safe conditions on their properties in order to protect their visitors from harm. But, a property owner will not necessarily be held liable for every accident on his property that is caused by inadequate lighting. In order to prove liability, the plaintiff must be able to show one of the following:

  • The property owner (or his employee) is responsible for the inadequate lighting
  • The property owner (or his employee) knew that there was inadequate lighting
  • The property owner (or his employee) should have known there was inadequate lighting because a reasonable property owner would have known about this issue.

If the plaintiff cannot prove one of the above conditions, the property owner will not be ordered to compensate you for your injuries.

Proving liability in inadequate lighting cases can be challenging, which is why you will need help from an experienced personal injury attorney. If you have been injured in a slip and fall, contact Reisch Law Firm today so we can begin gathering evidence to prove your case. Schedule a free consultation today by calling 303-291-0555 or filling out this online form.

What is the Attractive Nuisance Doctrine?

What is the Attractive Nuisance Doctrine?

If your child has been injured on another person’s property, it’s important that you understand the attractive nuisance doctrine and how this legal concept can impact your case. But in order to understand the attractive nuisance doctrine, you must first learn about the premises liability concept.

Premises Liability

Under premises liability laws, property owners have a legal obligation to maintain their properties in order to prevent injuries from occurring. But, they do not have an obligation to protect every person who steps foot onto the property. If someone is illegally trespassing on a property, the owner does not owe this trespasser the same duty of care that he owes to a legal visitor.

The Attractive Nuisance Doctrine

Adults know that trespassing is illegal, but young children might not understand this concept. Therefore, if your child sees something that grabs his attention in a neighbor’s yard, he may wander into the yard uninvited. Technically, he is trespassing since he is not a legal visitor, but because he is a child, the property owner may still be liable if he is injured.

The attractive nuisance doctrine was established so children who were injured on while illegally trespassing on another person’s property could recover compensation for their injuries from the property owner. There are four elements that must be proven in an attractive nuisance case, including:

  • The plaintiff was drawn to the property because of some activity or condition that is appealing to kids.
  • The activity or condition that grabbed the child’s attention created an unreasonable risk of injury to children.
  • The plaintiff was not mature enough to understand the potential risks. In Colorado, the attractive nuisance doctrine applies to children under the age of 14.
  • The defendant did not take any action to protect children like the plaintiff from injuries.

For example, a child may be drawn into a neighbor’s yard because he sees a pool and wants to go swimming. The child is so young that he does not understand the dangers of swimming unsupervised, so he jumps in, and suffers a traumatic brain injury after diving into the shallow end. In this case, the defendant may be held liable for the child’s injuries. However, if the defendant had a fence around his pool that was designed to keep young children out, he would probably not be held liable if the child still managed to injure himself in the pool.

Has your child been injured on another person’s property? Even if he was trespassing, he could still recover compensation with the help of the personal injury attorneys at Reisch Law Firm. Schedule a free consultation by calling 303-291-0555 or filling out this online form.

Who is Liable in Slip and Fall Accidents?

Who is Liable in Slip and Fall Accidents?

Slip and fall accidents can happen anywhere including grocery stores, hotels, amusement parks, and even in a friend’s home. These sudden accidents can often lead to serious injuries, including broken bones, muscle strains or sprains, head trauma, and spinal cord damage. If you’ve been involved in a slip and fall accident, you may be able to recover compensation for your injuries from the responsible party. But, who is liable in slip and fall accidents?

The Property Owner

The legal concept of premises liability plays an important role in slip and fall cases. In the state of Colorado, property owners are required to maintain safe conditions on their property. If a property owner fails to do so and a guest is injured as a result, the property owner could be held liable for the injuries.

However, a property owner is not automatically found liable for every injury that occurs on his property. It must be proven that the owner knew or should have known about the hazardous condition and did not take action to remedy the situation.

For example, let’s say a grocery store employee accidentally spills a cup of water on the floor and fails to clean it up. The puddle of water remains on the floor for hours, until you slip and fall on it while leaving the store. In this case, the property owner may not have known about the hazard. However, an attorney may be able to prove that he should have known about it because it was present for hours before the injury occurred.

The Victim

The person who was injured in the slip and fall may be partially or totally liable for his own injuries. For instance, he could have been distracted at the time of the accident, and thus unable to avoid hazards in his path.

Colorado is a modified comparative negligence state. This means you may still recover compensation for your injuries even if you are partially to blame, as long as you are not 50% or more responsible.

Using the examples above, say you could have avoided the slip and fall accident in the grocery store if you hadn’t been distracted by your cell phone. It may be determined that you are 30% responsible and the property owner was 70% responsible. In this case, you will only receive 70% of the compensation awarded to you. If you were found to be 50% or more liable, you would not receive any compensation.

If you have been injured in a slip and fall accident, it’s imperative you seek legal representation at once. Contact Reisch Law Firm today to learn how we can prove the property owner was liable so you can recover the compensation that you deserve. Schedule a free consultation by calling 303-291-0555 or filling out this online form.