Premises Liability

Why Florida Crime Victims Can Sometimes Sue Property Owners for Not Protecting Them

April 20, 2024 | by David J. Halberg, Esq.

Every year, there are more than 33,000 violent crimes reported in Florida. (The actual number is probably higher, as some violent crimes – particularly sexual assaults – go unreported.) Only a fraction of these cases will be prosecuted in a criminal court. But that may not be the only avenue for survivors to seek justice. Some crime victims may have grounds to sue the property owner where the attack occurred. Palm Beach injury lawyer premises liability dangerous property breakin

At first blush, that notion might seem a bit nonsensical. After all, the only person who is “guilty” is the one who actually carried out the attack, right?

Yes and no.

As our Palm Beach injury lawyers can explain, it’s true that the only person(s) who will be held criminally responsible (i.e., “guilty”) for a criminal act are those who were directly involved. However, civil claim liability can extend beyond that individual. In fact, most civil claims that stem from a criminal attack are filed against third parties – very often the property owner where the incident occurred.

Liability in these cases stems not from the act itself, but from the failure to protect lawful guests from risks that were reasonably foreseeable by the property owner. This is particularly true if those lawful guests are invited onsite by the property owner for the purpose of financial benefit to the property owner. (Ex: A paying hotel guest would be a “public invitee” who would be owed the highest duty of care and protection by that hotel/property manager.) Continue reading

Florida Premises Liability Claims Often Hinge on Claimant’s On-Site Role

May 10, 2023 | by David J. Halberg, Esq.

Florida personal injury claims for premises liability – that is, the duty owed by property owners to those who enter – often hinge on the role of the claimant. That is, were they invited as a member of the public or for the financial benefit of the property owner? They’re invitees, owed the highest duty of care. Were they welcomed or allowed onsite as a social guest or of their own volition for their own convenience? They’re licensees, owed a moderate duty of care. Or were they trespassers? With the exception of some situations involving children, these individuals are owed the lowest degree of care. Florida premises liability lawyer

So while property owners do have a responsibility to keep their site reasonably safe, measuring the reasonableness of their actions (or lack thereof) usually comes down to what the injured party was doing there in the first place.

Invitees would include shoppers at a grocery store, fans at a rock concert, a package delivery person, or residents attending a city council meeting. The specific duty of care owed to invitees in Florida is to maintain the property in reasonably safe condition AND to warn of any known hazards that could cause harm. This includes taking reasonable steps to discover and fix any dangerous conditions on the property. As our West Palm Beach injury lawyers can explain, property owners are expected to exercise ordinary care in maintaining the premises, which means acting in a reasonably prudent manner to prevent foreseeable injuries to invitees.

Licensees are those who enter a property with the owner’s permission, but for their own purposes. As noted in the 1953 Florida Supreme Court ruling in Stewart v. Texas Co., the owner owes no duty to licensees beyond not willfully or wantonly causing harm or setting traps or intentionally expose them to danger. Property owners do not have a duty to keep the premises safe for those who come there solely for their own convenience or pleasure, yet aren’t expressly invited or induced – even though entry is permitted. Active vigilance to keep the property safe isn’t required of property owners for licensees.

Trespassers, similarly, are not owed a duty of care beyond not being intentionally exposed to harm. (The exception is young children under the attractive nuisance doctrine, occurring when a feature of the site is attractive to youths who don’t fully understand the danger.)

It’s important to note that the specific circumstances of each case can affect the application of the duty of care. Different types of properties, such as residential, commercial, or recreational, may have varying standards of care depending on the nature of the premises and the activities taking place. Continue reading

Big Changes to Law Will Impact Florida Personal Injury Lawsuit Claimants

April 3, 2023 | by David J. Halberg, Esq.

Major changes to state law are going to significantly impact Florida personal injury lawsuit claimants – most of them adversely. Palm Beach personal injury lawyer

Among the provisions in the new law signed by Gov. Ron DeSantis on March 24, 2023:

A shortened statute of limitations in personal injury cases, from four years to file down to two years.
A less favorable comparative fault standard, going from a pure comparative fault standard to one that includes a 51 percent bar.
Elimination of bad faith insurers’ duty to pay plaintiff attorneys’ fees except in very limited circumstances.
Significant reductions in damage awards for defendants in negligent security actions.

For all the accusations of “slick trial lawyers” and “frivolous lawsuits” that were used to justify these actions, the reality is that it’s never been a simple thing to file – or succeed – in a Florida personal injury lawsuit. Not to say it’s impossible, but it does require a fact pattern with strong evidence that supports a conclusion of the defendant’s liability. These provisions were heralded as helping Florida rise above the “judicial hellhole” that it had become. But the reality is it’s going to make it harder for people with legitimate claims to file, win, and collect the full scope of damages to which they’re entitled. It’s certainly a boon for the insurance companies, though.

With respect to the shortened statute of limitations, this is problematic for a few reasons. One is that while four years seems like a long time, complex personal injury lawsuits take a lot of time to thoroughly investigate. Furthermore, one of the reasons for a four-year limit is that settlement negotiations (the way 95 percent of personal injury cases are resolved) can go back and forth for many months or even years. By shortening the statute of limitations, we’re likely to see a glut of personal injury lawsuits filed (within a court system that’s already overwhelmed) so that plaintiffs can ensure their claim is preserved. Settlement negotiations can still continue after a lawsuit is filed (up to and even well into the trial) – but a shorter statute of limitations means more plaintiffs will pursue litigation just so that they don’t lose the option if too much time passes.

Next up is the altered comparative fault standard. This is a big one, and it’s going to impact most personal injury plaintiffs in a negative way. Continue reading

South Florida Slip-and-Fall Injury on Cruise Ship Nets Nearly $300k

March 25, 2022 | by David J. Halberg, Esq.

Jurors awarded nearly $300,000 to a woman who suffered a broken leg and shoulder in a South Florida slip-and-fall injury that occurred on a cruise ship seven years ago. As our Palm Beach premises liability lawyers can explain, proving legal responsibility in such cases is rarely a cakewalk, particularly in a higher-value claim. Slip-and-fall cases especially have a high proof burden, as outlined in F.S. 768.0755. Cruise ship injury lawyer Florida

In this case, according to Daily Business Review, the 64-year-old passenger was reportedly walking across an exterior passageway of the ship when she fell. The ship, which departed from Tampa, was in the Caribbean Sea at the time of her fall. As a result of the fall, she sustained serious injuries to both her leg and shoulder (a fractured left femur and a displacement fracture of her right shoulder).

The day after the accident, she disembarked the ship and was treated in Fort Lauderdale’s Broward Hospital Medical Center, where she had a rod placed in her leg and plates and screws placed in her shoulder. She endured nearly two weeks in the hospital, followed by nearly a month of inpatient rehabilitation therapy. There were also numerous follow-up orthopedic evaluations, with treatment concluding about five months after the trip. Ongoing health issues stemming from the fall include residual pain and certain limitations. She cannot easily raise her right arm anymore, and long periods of walking leave her in great pain. Despite reaching maximum medical improvement, these problems persist and may never go away.

In her subsequent South Florida slip-and-fall injury lawsuit (filed in federal court), she alleged the owner/operator of the ship was negligent in creating a dangerous condition that resulted in her fall. Specifically, she said her leg caught on a lounge chair, one of many chairs aligned in a row on a narrow, curved passageway next to a restaurant. The woman was walking behind her husband at the time because the walkway wasn’t wide enough for them to walk side-by-side. Her husband walking in front of her, she said, obscured her view of the chair. At trial, a cruise ship safety expert for the plaintiff testified that the chairs presented a walking hazard in that they substantially reduced the amount of space pedestrians had while traversing the walkway. Continue reading

Florida Trip & Fall Lawsuit Alleges Dangerous Sidewalk is Fault of Restaurant and City

February 2, 2022 | by David J. Halberg, Esq.

Can a Florida restaurant be liable for the dangerous condition of an adjacent sidewalk, even if the portion of pavement in question is technically owned by the city? In a pending South Florida trip-and-fall lawsuit, the answer is: Maybe. As our Palm Beach injury lawyers can explain, more than one entity can be liable for a dangerous walkway condition. Here, the final ruling is likely to come down to the level of control the restaurant had over the sidewalk. Palm Beach restaurant injury lawyer

Gass v. Chops City Grill, Inc., is a case out of Naples recently weighed by Florida’s 2nd District Court of Appeals. Both the original plaintiff – a woman who was injured after tripping on a section of sidewalk – and the City of Naples, a co-defendant in the case, appealed the lower court’s summary judgment in favor of a local restaurant. The restaurant had successfully argued it had no duty of care to the woman or responsibility to maintain the sidewalk, which it didn’t own. But the appellate court reversed, finding the restaurant hadn’t met its proof burden. The case will now proceed against both defendants.

According to court records, plaintiff was with her then-boyfriend in 2015, on their way to meet another couple at a Naples restaurant. Her boyfriend dropped her off in front of a different restaurant (defendant’s) before driving away to find a parking spot. After plaintiff got out of the car, she stepped off the street and onto the sidewalk. Within a couple of steps, she fell to the ground and was hurt. She wasn’t sure the exact spot where she fell, but it was an area with pavers in front of the defendant’s restaurant. At the time she fell, she said she wasn’t paying close attention to the ground, as she was looking around at which direction she needed to go.

In her subsequent premises liability lawsuit, she initially named only the city. Later, she added the restaurant as a co-defendant. She alleged that as a business invitee to the City of Naples, the city owed her a duty of care to maintain the premises/sidewalk in a way that ensured the walkway was safe. Instead, it was defective/dangerous. The city’s failure, she asserted, amounted to negligence and was the proximate cause of her injury.

She lodged a similar complaint against the restaurant, which she said had negligently or incorrectly installed the pavers, making them unsafe, defective, and dangerous, resulting in a public tripping hazard. She further alleged the restaurant knew about this dangerous condition and failed to remedy it. Continue reading

South Florida Negligent Security Claim Targets Store, Storage Unit Owner

January 30, 2022 | by David J. Halberg, Esq.

South Florida negligent security lawsuits involve allegations that a property owner failed to use reasonable care to protect lawful guests from foreseeable harms – including crimes committed by third parties. The occurrence of a criminal act resulting in injury on its own doesn’t open the door to a civil lawsuit against the property owner. Some very specific boxes need to be checked to proceed with this type of premises liability claim. Palm Beach negligent security lawyer

One recently-filed negligent security claim accuses a store and storage unit of failing to protect a South Florida surgeon who was kidnapped, beaten and threatened with death by two attackers.

According to the civil complaint, the incident occurred three years ago. His kidnappers, armed with guns and tasers, accosted him at a Hallandale Beach store parking lot, stunned him with a taser and then threw him into the rear of a cargo van before driving him to a local storage unit. There, he later told law enforcement, he was bound to a rolling chair and burned with metal cutters heated by blow torches, slapped, punched, threatened, coerced into giving his home access code and forced to drink alcohol until he passed out. The motive, authorities say, was robbery. The two assailants dumped him – tied up – in the back seat of his car early the next morning. That’s where police found him.

One of the men was sentenced to 11 years in prison after pleading guilty to federal kidnapping and conspiracy charges. The other, whose estranged wife was a patient of the doctor’s, was extradited from Spain and convicted last month on the same charges as the other. He faces a possible sentence of life in prison.

But as our South Florida negligent security attorneys can explain, that’s not the end of the ordeal. Entirely separate from the criminal proceedings is the civil case, which alleges both the store and the storage unit failed in their legal duty to take reasonably prudent measures to protect people on their respective properties. Plaintiff asserted both businesses had a history of prior violent crimes on site and failed to take adequate measures to keep people safe. Continue reading

Thanksgiving Safety Tips From Our South Florida Injury Lawyers

November 19, 2021 | by David J. Halberg, Esq.

Thanksgiving is all about gathering and good eats. Lots of folks are especially excited about this year’s festivities, as pandemic-related restrictions have increasingly eased. However, many holiday safety concerns persist year after year. Palm Beach injury lawyer

As longtime South Florida injury lawyers, the cases we handle almost all involve preventable injuries resulting from the failure of someone else to use reasonable care – not necessarily because they meant to cause harm, but simply because they weren’t careful. If at all possible, we want people to avoid associating joyful holidays like Thanksgiving with sadness or regret. That’s why we urge everyone to take a few minutes to ensure they’re being as safe as possible – behind the wheel, in front of the stove, through the stores, and at the table.

Driving Dangers on Thanksgiving

Palm Beach Dangerous Property Claims: Overcoming the “Obvious Danger” Defense

November 5, 2021 | by David J. Halberg, Esq.

In Florida, property owners have a legal responsibility to keep their properties reasonably safe, and to warn visitors of any dangerous conditions. This duty, which falls under the umbrella of premises liability law, is applicable to hazards about which the owner knows (or reasonably should know), but which a visitor couldn’t have discovered using reasonable care. Palm Beach injury lawyer

Defendant property owners can sometimes win these types of cases by raising the “open and obvious” defense. This defense asserts that the danger was so open and obvious there was no need to warn guests of it.

As our Palm Beach injury lawyers can explain, though, this is not a complete defense. That is, a property owner isn’t going to win their case solely based on the fact that the danger was open and obvious. Rather, it’s considered a factor in deciding who is at fault. In Florida, plaintiffs may share a percentage of the fault (referred to as comparative fault) and still collect a percentage of the damages.

Recently in the case of Pratus v. Marzucco’s Construction & Coatings, Inc., an employee of an electrical subcontractor was hurt when stepping into an uncovered drain at a South Florida construction site. He conceded he’d seen the drain uncovered numerous times at work, but argued the general contractor was still liable for the dangerous condition on site. A trial court granted summary judgment to the defendant general contractor, on the grounds that the dangerous condition was open and obvious. But in its reversal, the Florida 2nd District Court of Appeal underscored two significant points:

It is the danger, not the condition, that is obvious to the visitor. You might be aware that a dangerous condition exists on site, but you might mistakenly (and reasonably) think the landowner put some safeguards in place to protect against the danger. In the case recently before the 2nd DCA, the drain in question was covered and uncovered at various times. Sometimes the door that led to it was marked with caution tape. On the day of the incident, there was no tape over the door, despite the fact that the drain was uncovered that day.
Owners have a legal responsibility to anticipate the actions of those who enter the property. That’s not to say they need a crystal ball, but they need to consider the potential actions of reasonable and prudent persons on site. Construction sites can have SO many dangers. Those working at the site might need to get to a certain location, but the path they took, with its inherent dangers, may be the only option. In that case, even if they knew about the risk and it was open and obvious, they might be partially excused for failing to avoid it.

The bottom line is that where a property owner expects or should have known that a danger – however open or obvious – might pose a realistic threat to invitees, the jury can still hold the property owner responsible, even if the visitor/plaintiff shares some of the blame too. This is especially true if there is evidence of negligence per se, which would involve violation of a health or safety statute. Continue reading

$5 Million South Florida Negligent Security Affirmed by 4th DCA

January 15, 2021 | by David J. Halberg, Esq.

In Florida, business owners, property managers, landlords and security contractors have a legal duty to take necessary steps to secure their premises and prevent foreseeable harm to patrons, residents and lawful guests. If a property owner fails in this duty, he or she can be held legally responsible for the damages. West Palm Beach negligent security

A poorly-secured premises can leave people vulnerable to robbery, sexual assault or another violent attack leading to serious and physical and emotional injuries. Sometimes, it can lead to death.

Negligent security is a special type of premises liability claim wherein someone alleges their injury by a third-party criminal on another person’s property was at least partially the result of the property owner’s failure to make the site safe when they had a responsibility to do so.

There are several defenses in negligent security cases for which your legal team should be prepared, as was illustrated in an appellate case recently before Florida’s 4th District Court of Appeal. In Pride of St. Lucie Lodge 1189 Inc. v. Reed et al, the issue was whether the court erred in awarding $5 million to the plaintiff (daughter of decedent), given that decedent had been involved in a felonious brawl at defendant night club just prior to her death. Continue reading

Third-Party Liability for Work Injuries Highlighted in Acrobat Injury Settlement

January 4, 2021 | by David J. Halberg, Esq.

Eight acrobats who suffered life-altering injuries in a 2014 circus accident in which they fell 20 feet while hanging from their hair reached a $52 million settlement last month with the owner of the arena where it occurred. Notably, the Florida-based circus that employed them was not named as a defendant in that case. West Palm Beach injury lawyer

As our South Florida injury lawyers can explain, much of that has to do with the fact that state workers’ compensation laws stipulate that workers’ comp insurance is the exclusive remedy against an employer for work-related injuries. That doesn’t necessarily mean people who are seriously injured on-the-job don’t have alternative claims against third parties. This type of claim is more common in hazardous professions like construction, truck driving, warehousing, nursing, etc., where workers are often contracted to work at that location by another company. Continue reading