corporateabuse.net

Have you recently had a “Slip and Fall” that caused serious injuries? You want to know what your claim is worth, so you are searching the web, and this is one of the many sites that showed up. What most websites don’t show you is the Premise Liability Act was amended back in the 90’s, and this allowed for drastically different verdicts depending on the case circumstances. As always, we recommend getting an attorney’s opinion. There are many more elements an attorney can proved that might be helpful.

Premise Liability is not as simple as we might expect. There is the case of a lady who spills coffee in her lap, and becomes a millionaire. Well, because of frivolous law suits such as that one, legitimate claims for serious injuries are more difficult to win in court due to the P.L. act amendment. There are certain elements that have to be proven. The Onstad Law Firm shows us these elements in simple form “To prevail on a premises liability claim, the injured party must prove each of the following elements by a preponderance of the evidence:
1.    The landowner had actual (licensee) or constructive knowledge (invitee) of some condition on the premises
2.    The condition posed an unreasonable risk of harm
3.    The landowner did not exercise reasonable care to repair or eliminate the risk
4.    And, the failure to exercise reasonable care proximately caused the visitor’s injury”
We will not focus our attention these elements per se, but we will focus on the act itself.
These changes in the Premise Liability Act have serious repercussions. For example, if you enter a convenience store and purchase a fountain drink, you are considered an “Invitee.” If while filling your beverage you slip on a substance on the floor and are injured, common sense tells us the “Owner” has a certain “duty” to you. Their first duty is of course is to give you their insurance information. We strongly recommend you find an attorney, and discuss what happened. If you contact the insurance company, and they record any statements from you, this could hurt your future lawsuit. Consult with an attorney, they will go over some very simple questions with you and be able to decide right away whether or not to pursue this case with the landowner’s insurance company.
Here is the kicker; the owner is not required to place a floor mat down where beverages are poured. Furthermore, how can any attorney prove in a court of law that the landowner had actual (licensee) or constructive knowledge (invitee) of some condition on the premises? Du Page County Bar goes as far to say that “Paradoxically, the Act appears to put the duty of inspection on the injured party, requiring that he or she uncover dangers that could be “reasonably” discovered.” So while you’re looking ahead to keep from getting injured from objects in front, you are also responsible for looking down at the floor so that you don’t slip in someone else’s mess. Do you still want to know what your case is worth? We have searched through many cases, and found one that is for the most part in “layman’s” terms, this will give you an idea of what you are up against.
Let’s give you a defensive attorney’s perspective; Lester Schwab Katz and Dwyer has a well laid out program, here is a snippet for you look at “Ultimately, the most persuasive proof will be what the jury actually sees, particularly if the condition is not as bad as plaintiff claims or if the theory of liability defies common sense or physical laws.” I know this is business for defense attorneys and defendants of premise liability, but here is the human touch. A plaintiff is injured to the point that they need medical attention, and a defendant’s attorney’s first agenda is to show that the condition is “not that bad.”

We can derive all the opinion’s we want from Premise Liability cases. The simple fact remains, if “owners” choose to ignore public safety, such as not using floor mats where they are needed, then the “owner” needs to be held accountable. So what’s your claim worth, well it depends if your attorney can prove those 4 elements in court.