How Does Comparative Negligence Affect Slip-and-Fall Injuries?

 Posted on July 19,2024 in Premises Liability

Imagine the following scenario: A delivery driver named John visits the grocery store to pick up some items for the house. As he walks through the aisles, he texts his wife with questions about the shopping list. While on his phone, John fails to notice the puddle in the middle of the aisle coming from an open bag of ice that has fallen from the freezer. He slips and falls, suffering a concussion and a wrist fracture. Now unable to drive, John is forced to take extended time off work until he fully heals.

An investigation finds that the store knew about the fallen bag of ice for over an hour but neither removed it nor placed a sign warning shoppers that the area was wet. 

John consults his California slip-and-fall injury attorney who investigates the case. The lawyer determines that the store’s management was negligent and John can likely claim compensation from the store for damages resulting from his injury. However, the attorney warns John that his compensation might be affected by California’s comparative negligence law.

What Is Comparative Negligence?

Comparative negligence means that more than one person can be found negligent for an injury, including the victim. If the victim is determined to be partially at fault for the injury, his or her compensation is reduced by the amount of fault. For example, if an insurance company or jury finds that the victim was 30 percent responsible for the injury, his or her payout will be reduced by 30 percent.

Many states have modified comparative negligence laws, meaning that the victim is not eligible for compensation if he or she is more than 50 percent at fault. California, however, has a pure comparative negligence law. This means that a victim can claim damages even with 99 percent of the fault.

How Does Comparative Negligence Affect Slip-and-Fall Injuries?

In a comparative negligence state like California, it is not only the owner of the premises who may be liable for a slip-and-fall injury. 

In John’s case, for instance, he may be found to be partially at fault because he was texting on his phone. Had he been looking ahead, he might have been able to avoid the puddle. John, therefore, was somewhat negligent by paying attention to his phone and not where he was walking. How much fault he has will depend on several factors, such as:

• The facts of the case

• The jury or insurance company

• The skill of John’s attorney

Contact a Los Angeles, CA Premises Liability Lawyer

Comparative negligence can complicate a personal injury claim. Even if you think you have a great premises liability case, an insurance company will try to blame you for as much fault as possible. Make sure you are represented by an aggressive, experienced Los Angeles County, CA slip-and-fall injury attorney who is familiar with comparative negligence. At Tahmazian Law Firm, P.C., we are highly experienced in premises liability and slip-and-fall injuries, and we will use our vast legal resources to secure the most compensation possible for you. Call 818-242-8201 to schedule a free consultation today.