Slip & Fall Attorney in New York

What Happened at the Property Matters

A slip or trip can become a premises liability claim when a dangerous property condition contributed to an injury and a legally responsible party created the condition or had the required notice of it.

Wet floors, broken walking surfaces, defective stairs, poor lighting, snow, ice, and other hazards can raise very different legal and factual questions.

At Barket Epstein Kearon Aldea & LoTurco, LLP, our personal injury attorneys investigate who controlled the property, how the condition developed, whether it had been reported or inspected, and what evidence exists to connect the hazard to the fall.

These cases can depend on evidence that changes or disappears quickly. A spill may be cleaned. Ice can melt. A broken surface may be repaired. Surveillance footage can be overwritten.

What Must Be Proven in a New York Slip & Fall Claim?

New York property owners and others responsible for premises may have a duty to maintain property in a reasonably safe condition under the circumstances.

A premises liability claim generally requires more than proof that someone fell on the property.

Depending on the case, important questions include:

• What dangerous or defective condition caused the fall?
• Who owned, occupied, controlled, maintained, or repaired the area?
• Did a responsible party create the condition?
• Did that party have actual or constructive notice of it?
• Did the condition cause the claimed injuries and losses?

Our broader New York premises liability practice addresses injuries arising from unsafe residential, commercial, and other property conditions.

Actual and Constructive Notice Can Be Central to the Case

A property owner or other responsible party may have actual notice when there is direct knowledge of the dangerous condition.

Constructive notice involves a different question.

A condition can support constructive notice when it was visible and apparent and existed long enough before the accident to give the responsible party a reasonable opportunity to discover and correct it.

That makes inspection and maintenance evidence particularly important.

Depending on the location, useful records may include:

• Cleaning and inspection logs
• Prior complaints
• Maintenance requests
• Repair records
• Incident reports
• Surveillance footage
• Employee or witness testimony

A general awareness that floors sometimes become wet or sidewalks sometimes deteriorate does not necessarily establish notice of the particular condition that caused the accident.

Different Parties May Control Different Parts of the Property

Ownership alone does not always answer who may be responsible.

The relevant party can depend on who controlled the accident location and who had authority or a contractual responsibility to inspect, clean, maintain, repair, or warn about the condition.

Potentially involved parties may include:

• Property owners
• Commercial tenants
• Landlords
• Property managers
• Maintenance or snow-removal contractors
• Other contractors
• Municipal or public entities

The analysis becomes particularly important in shopping centers, apartment buildings, office properties, parking facilities, and other locations where several parties may divide maintenance responsibilities.

Snow and Ice Claims Have Additional Rules

Snow and ice cases require more than asking whether the surface was slippery.

For outdoor conditions, New York's storm-in-progress doctrine can affect when a property owner has a duty to remove or remedy snow and ice.

A property owner generally is not required to eliminate storm-created snow or ice while a storm remains in progress or before a reasonable period has passed after it ends.

That does not create blanket immunity.

If an owner or contractor undertakes snow or ice removal and creates or worsens a dangerous condition, liability may still become an issue. The timing of precipitation, temperature changes, prior accumulation, snow-removal work, and the exact location of the fall can all matter.

An indoor fall involving tracked-in water or snow also presents a different analysis. The outdoor storm-in-progress rule should not simply be assumed to resolve an indoor premises claim.

Weather records and photographs from the scene may therefore become important evidence.