Resources

Category: Slip and Fall

Jan 15, 2021 - Slip and Fall

Airport Slip and Falls

Let an Allentown Slip and Fall Lawyer Fight For Your Rights In a typical Pennsylvania slip and fall accident at a public place such as an airport, the injured victim; i.e., the plaintiff, needs to prove the following: The airport had a duty to protect the injured victim from unreasonably dangerous conditions; The airport breached that duty; That breach of duty caused the slip and fall accident to occur; and The slip and fall accident caused the victim to sustain injuries and damages. The most difficult element to prove will be #2: How did the airport breach its duty to protect the injured victim from unreasonably dangerous conditions? Several years ago, A Delaware woman sued the City of Philadelphia and a snow removal contractor for injuries she sustained after falling to the ground at Philadelphia International Airport in a premises liability case. According to the complaint, the plaintiff was walking at the airport near Gate F8 on Dec. 21, 2009, when she slipped and fell on ice that had accumulated on the ground. The lawsuit alleged carelessness and negligence for failing to properly and adequately maintain the premises and for allowing a dangerous and hazardous condition to exist. This is a typical airport slip and fall scenario. If you have been injured by a slip and fall accident in Pennsylvania, contact an Allentown slip and fall lawyer at Drake, Hileman & Davis for help. Common Causes for Slip and Fall Accidents at Airports An airport property owner has a duty […]

Read More

Dec 15, 2020 - Slip and Fall

Inadequate Lighting and Slip and Fall Lawsuits

Hire an Experienced Allentown Slip and Fall Lawyer If you’ve been injured in a slip and fall accident due to inadequate lighting issues — perhaps at a retail store, or at an office — then Pennsylvania law may entitle you to sue and recover significant damages.  Let’s take a closer look at some of the issues typical of a slip and fall dispute, and more specifically when the dangerous condition involves inadequate lighting. Basics of a Slip and Fall Case Slip and fall cases fall under the umbrella of “premises liability” disputes.  In the premises liability and slip and fall context, an individual is entitled to sue and recover damages if they injure themselves on another’s property due to the existence of a dangerous condition. Dangerous conditions can include liquid spills and other hazards, such as poor and inadequate lighting.  For example, if you are walking on a tile surface, and there’s an obvious spill, but you don’t notice it due to dim lighting conditions, then you would be entitled to bring an action against the defendant if you suffer a slip and fall injury as a result. Evaluating the Surrounding Circumstances Establishing the liability of the property owner isn’t always straightforward, especially in a case where you are attempting to show that inadequate lighting was a dangerous condition.  You’ll not only have to show that the lighting was sufficiently poor to pose an unreasonable risk of injury, but you’ll also have to show that the defendant knew or should […]

Read More

Oct 17, 2019 - Premises Liability

Common Defenses in Slip and Fall Lawsuits

In Pennsylvania, and elsewhere, slip and fall injury claims come under the umbrella of premises liability, which gives those who sustain injuries on another’s property the opportunity to sue and recover damages if their injury was caused by the defendant failure to maintain their property in a reasonably safe condition. Suppose, for example, that you are walking through the defendant’s store, and a defective tile suddenly breaks loose, causing you to slip and fall, injuring yourself.  Given these circumstances, you would very likely be entitled to bring an action against the defendant for damages. Though you may feel that you have a strong claim, it’s important not to underestimate the defendant in a slip and fall lawsuit.  Pennsylvania law affords slip and fall defendants a number of strategic defenses that can be used to avoid or minimize their liability.  In order to successfully recover damages, you’ll therefore have to understand how to circumvent or otherwise undermine these defenses. For clarity, let’s explore three of the most commonly encountered defenses in Pennsylvania slip and fall injury lawsuits. Open and Obvious Condition All premises liability claims — including slip and fall injury claims — require that the dangerous condition at-issue is non-obvious.  In other words, if the dangerous slip and fall condition would be hidden and unobservable by the average person (in similar circumstances to the plaintiff), then liability may attach.  If the defendant can show that you were aware of the dangerous condition, or that it was sufficiently obvious that you […]

Read More

Aug 9, 2019 - Slip and Fall

Assumption of Risk in Pennsylvania

Assumption of risk is a common defense utilized by defendants in the slip and fall injury context, and in many other personal injury disputes.  Essentially, the defendant is arguing that the plaintiff cannot hold them liable due to having knowingly and willfully accepted the risk of harm associated with an activity. Let’s take a closer look. Understanding the General Principles In Pennsylvania, a case can be dismissed entirely if the court finds that the plaintiff assumed the risk of injury.  Whether the plaintiff assumed the risk is ultimately a question of whether the plaintiff knew about the risk (and chose to accept that risk). Without evidence of actual knowledge, the court may evaluate the obviousness of the dangerous condition or activity involved.  In doing so, the court will compare your actions to that of a reasonable person who is similarly situated to you.  For example, if you choose to jump off a cliff into murky water below, then that is a fundamentally dangerous situation (you don’t know if your trajectory will put you far enough away from the cliff, and there may be rocks hidden in the water) — it’s fair to say that a reasonable person in the same circumstances would not jump off the cliff.  Thus, the court would find that the dangerous condition was obvious and that you willfully assumed the risk of injury by jumping. Assumption of Risk as it Pertains to Slip and Fall Cases Slip and fall cases frequently involve a specific expression of […]

Read More

Feb 28, 2019 - Slip and Fall

Slip and Falls: Understanding the Non-Obviousness Requirement

Bethlehem Slip and Fall Lawyers If you’ve slipped, tripped, or otherwise lost your balance on another’s property due to the existence of a dangerous condition of property (in other words, a “hazard”), then Pennsylvania law may entitle you to compensation for your injuries. Though your prospective lawsuit may seem rather simple in the initial stages, there are a number of ways in which the defendant may attempt to avoid or minimize liability.  Quite commonly, defendants in slip and fall cases argue that the injured plaintiff is precluded from recovery because the dangerous condition of property — the hazard — was known or obvious to the plaintiff. This defense can pose a real challenge when it comes to securing compensation, so let’s examine it in brief to understand how it works.  By learning about the basics, you’ll get a sense for how an attorney can overcome the defense. Existence of a Known or Obvious Hazard is a Complete Defense to Liability Slip and fall liability is a subcategory of premises liability — stated simply, the defendant property owner (or possessor) can be held liable for failing to exercise due care, and thereby exposing others to an unreasonable risk of harm.  For example, if you’re eating at a restaurant, and you slip and fall on the way to the bathroom due to a large spill on the floor, then you could potentially sue and recover damages.  The defendant’s failure to inspect the floors and clean the spill would likely constitute negligence. It’s […]

Read More

Dec 14, 2018 - Slip and Fall

Frequency of Floor Inspections and Slip and Fall Lawsuits

Contact an Easton Slip and Fall Attorney Today For Assistance Though slip-and-fall accidents are commonplace — in Pennsylvania and elsewhere — many injured plaintiffs are unaware of how such lawsuits work, or the particular challenges that they are likely to face as they move forward with litigation. In the slip-and-fall context, the frequency with which the defendant conducted floor inspections may have a significant impact on whether you can successfully prove that they are liable for your injuries. Let’s take a closer look. Slip and Fall Basics Slip-and-fall accidents come under the umbrella of premises liability claims.  In the state of Pennsylvania, liability will attach to those who exercise control or possession over a given property if the plaintiff is injured due to a dangerous condition of property (i.e., a slip-and-fall hazard).  For example, if the plaintiff slips on a water spill at a retail store, then that would qualify as a hazard that could expose the defendant (the store owner) to potential civil liability and damages. Now, as a plaintiff, your slip-and-fall claim may be met with various defenses.  Depending on the circumstances, the defendant is likely to argue that they did not know about the dangerous condition of property (i.e., the slip-and-fall hazard) that caused you to be injured.  Knowledge is a critical consideration in the slip-and-fall context.  If the defendant did not have knowledge of the hazard, then they can avoid liability. Importantly, however, the defendant’s ignorance is not a complete defense.  If you can show that […]

Read More

Aug 31, 2018 - Personal Injury

You May Be Entitled to Damages for Slipping on Ice

In Pennsylvania, snow and ice accumulation is a fact of life and the time to pull out the snow boots and shovels is quickly approaching.  Nearly every season, residents and visitors are likely to encounter the dangers of such conditions, and some may slip-and-fall and injure themselves — perhaps even severely — and depending on the circumstances, the slip-and-fall injury could give rise to a significant, actionable claim for damages under Pennsylvania law. Let’s take a brief look at the basic rule (the “Hills and Ridges” rule) that applies to such disputes. Application of the Hills and Ridges Rule Unlike the courts in warmer weather states, Pennsylvania courts have had to modify the rules of premises liability somewhat to account for the universal injury threat posed by snow and ice conditions during winter months.  Simply put, it would not be reasonable for property owners to be held liable for injuries caused by natural snow and ice conditions in most cases, as the imposition of liability would force property owners to invest enormous amounts of money and effort into spotlessly maintaining their properties throughout the season. The Hills and Ridges rule implemented by Pennsylvania courts attempts to carve out a reasonable “slice” of liability that allows injured claimants to obtain compensation in cases where the defendant has clearly violated a duty to maintain the property in a reasonably safe condition for visitors. Essentially, the Hills and Ridges rule allows injured plaintiffs to impose liability on the defendant property owner only if: […]

Read More

nbta badge super lawyers badge avvo badge rising star badge Million Dollar Advocates Forum Peer Review Rated paaj champion badge NAOPIA

WHAT OUR CLIENTS ARE SAYING

"About two years ago, I had a car accident in Bethlehem and got injured. Some of the other lawyers did not want to look at my case because of my low insurance. I finally found Drake, Hileman & Davis. They did their best to defend my rights. Finally I got what I want (considerable amount of compensation) with the great help of the company. Thank you so much for the excellent service."
Posted By: Muammer Durak

Drake, Hileman & Davis

Get Answers

Complete our contact form and get a response within 24 hours.