Articles Tagged with Miami slip and fall attorneys

Can Property Owners be Liable for Weather-Related Slips and Falls?


When most people consider slip and fall claims, they picture a shopper in a grocery store slipping and falling in a puddle of milk. Or, they may picture an individual in a shopping center who trips over merchandise that has fallen into an aisle. However, did you know that property owners may also be liable for slips and falls that are primarily caused by the weather? Miami personal injury attorneys help these individuals recover for their injuries.

For example, consider a clothing store that has linoleum or tile flooring. On a summer afternoon, the sky turns dark and a thunderstorm rolls in. A period of heavy rain lasts for about thirty minutes. After the storm clears, shoppers begin trickling into the store. They carry umbrellas that are dripping wet, and their rain jackets and shoes also spread water on the floor. Employees do not mop the wet floor for an hour, and a man enters the store, slips, falls and breaks his hip. The store is can be legally responsible liable for the man’s injuries if it can be proven that the employees waited an excessive amount of time to mop up the water, or failed to warn of the hazard. If store employees had only waited a short period of time to correct the condition the claim could be more difficult to bring. That is unless, it can be proven that condition was one that happened with regularity that the store was on notice and should have entertained more corrective measures. In other words, the store and or employees did not act in a reasonable manner to remove safeguard the premises from a known hazard.

Florida’s liability system is based upon what is known as comparative fault, or comparative liability. What this means is that if you are injured as a result of someone else’s negligence, a jury at trial can reduce your award by any amount that you were negligent—that is, the extent that you were responsible for your own injury.

This often comes into play in a slip and fall, where a defendant may claim that you should have been looking where you were going, or in an auto accident, where a defendant may allege that you could have avoided the accident. But a negligent defendant in a recent case argued a novel theory, attempting to prove that the kind of shoes a woman wears allows a court to apportion liability to her.

Woman Slips in High Heels

It’s not often that a court has to determine what the law was, and what law applied, almost five years previously. But a recent slip and fall case has caused a court to evaluate whether a law changed back in 2010 should apply to an accident that happened in 2005.

Child Falls on Substance in a Mall

A woman alleged that in 2005, her minor son fell on a slippery substance in shopping mall, right near a Chick-Fil-A restaurant. She sued for his injuries, alleging the restaurant negligently allowed the foreign substance to remain on the floor, and knew or should have known it was there, thus creating a dangerous condition.