Syracuse Personal Injury Law Blog
Slip-and-fall accidents are among the most common types of personal injury claims, often hinging on whether a property owner failed to maintain safe premises. In lawsuits arising out of slip and fall accidents, the courts closely analyze whether the defendant had notice of a hazardous condition and whether reasonable steps were taken to prevent injuries to determine whether the plaintiff can proceed with their claim. A recent New York case illustrates the burden of proof plaintiffs face when alleging negligence in a premises liability case. If you were injured in a slip-and-fall accident, consulting a Syracuse personal injury attorney can help you understand your legal options.
History of the Case
It is alleged that the plaintiff entered the defendant’s grocery store to purchase seafood when she slipped and fell near the fish counter. Reportedly, the store maintained a seafood display that utilized ice, which was designed to melt into a floor drain. The plaintiff claimed that water had accumulated on the floor near the display, creating a hazardous condition. After her fall, she noticed her clothes were wet and observed a puddle in the area where she fell.
It is reported that the plaintiff filed a negligence lawsuit against the defendant, asserting that the store failed to maintain safe premises and neglected to take adequate precautions to prevent hazardous conditions. The defendant moved for summary judgment, arguing that there was no evidence it had actual or constructive notice of the alleged hazard and that its routine maintenance procedures ensured the safety of customers. The trial court granted the defendant’s motion, dismissing the plaintiff’s claims, leading to an appeal.
Demonstrating Fault in Slip and Fall Cases
The court evaluated the case under the standard applicable to summary judgment motions in personal injury claims. It reiterated that a defendant seeking summary judgment must demonstrate either that it did not create the hazardous condition or that it had no actual or constructive notice of its existence. The burden then shifts to the plaintiff to provide evidence establishing that the defendant had noticed and failed to remedy the hazard within a reasonable time.
In support of its motion, the defendant submitted evidence showing that store employees conducted regular inspections and that a designated maintenance team performed hourly checks of the premises. The defense also presented surveillance footage and witness testimony indicating that no complaints regarding a wet floor had been made before the plaintiff’s fall. The court found that this evidence was sufficient to shift the burden to the plaintiff.
In response, the plaintiff argued that the store’s seafood display routinely caused water accumulation, making it a recurring condition. However, the court determined that the plaintiff failed to provide sufficient evidence proving that the water had been present long enough for the defendant to have constructive notice. The court emphasized that general awareness of potential hazards is insufficient to establish liability without evidence showing that the hazard was visible and apparent for a reasonable period before the incident.
Ultimately, the court affirmed the trial court’s ruling, concluding that the plaintiff had not met the burden of proof required to establish liability.
Consult a Trusted Syracuse Personal Injury Attorney
Property owners have a legal duty to maintain safe premises and take reasonable measures to prevent hazardous conditions. If you were injured due to a slip-and-fall accident in a store or other commercial establishment, you may have grounds for a personal injury claim, and you should consult a lawyer. The trusted Syracuse personal injury attorneys at DeFrancisco & Falgiatano Personal Injury Lawyers can assess your case and advise you of your options. Contact us at 833-200-2000 or reach out online to schedule a consultation.