Premises Liability Lawyers Serving Royal Palm Beach

If you are injured on someone else's property due to a hazardous condition or negligence, the owner may be liable for your injuries and resulting damages. To make a successful premise liability claim in Royal Palm Beach, Florida, you need to establish that the property owner was at fault.

The burden of proof is on you to prove negligence, meaning that you must show that the owner either knew or should have known about a hazardous condition and did not take reasonable steps to correct it—or failed to warn about hazards of which they were aware If the defendant can prove they did not know the hazardous conditions or warning of an inherently dangerous activity, they may not be liable. Therefore, to make a strong case for premise liability in Royal Palm, Florida.

It is important that you provide evidence of who was responsible for creating or maintaining the dangerous condition or failing to warn of potential risks before an accident occurred. Evidence such as photographs or witness statements can provide insight into blame and liability when making a claim.

How Is Fault or Blame Determined in A Premises Liability Case?

No matter where you are, determining fault or blame in a premises liability case is key. The standard for determining fault is a little different in Florida than in other states. The court will determine whether or not the property owner or occupier was negligent in maintaining their property and providing adequate warning to visitors.

The court considers negligence and liability when examining a premises liability case. Negligence is typically broken down into two categories: The property owner's duties of care to visitors and the visitor's duty of care to themselves. Both parties must prove that they acted reasonably to be liable for damages.

In determining fault, Florida courts consider whether the owner or occupier had sufficient control over the property, how much time they had to fix any dangerous conditions, warnings that were given (or not given), and other various factors, including whether or not the visitor exercised reasonable care while on the property.

Can More Than One Party Be Held Responsible for A Premises Liability Incident?

It's possible that more than one party can be held responsible for an incident that leads to a premises liability claim in Florida. Generally, if a property owner invites someone onto the premises, and an injury results from dangerous conditions, that owner may have to pay damages.

This includes any other parties involved in the incident, such as:

  • Contractors or subcontractors who were present and contributed to the hazardous condition
  • Manufacturers of unsafe products used on the property
  • Property managers or rental agents who may have had control over safety inspections
  • Organizations running events on the property and/or who failed to provide sufficient security.

For instance, if you trip and fall due to a broken sidewalk outside of an apartment building, but it turns out the building owners or managers did not properly maintain the walkway, both parties could be liable for your injuries. Ultimately, no matter how complex it may seem, you can consult an experienced premises liability attorney to determine your claim's specifics.

What Is Comparative Negligence and How Does It Apply to Premises Liability Cases?

If you're considering filing a premises liability claim in Florida, you should be aware of the concept of comparative negligence. This doctrine limits the damages an injured person can claim from another party.

Here's how it works: if both parties are found to have been negligent and contributed to a personal injury, the number of damages each is held liable for will be proportionate to their respective degree of fault.

But what does this mean in practice?

Determining Fault
When determining comparative negligence, Courts will examine how both parties acted leading up to an incident. For example, if you were standing on property owned by someone else who failed to properly maintain their premises and remove any hazards.

But you were staring at your phone instead of paying attention to your surroundings, so you didn't notice any potential danger until it was too late. Both sides could be found to be partially responsible—you for not paying attention and the property owner for failing to maintain their premises.

Maximum Liability
When two separate parties are determined as being partially at fault in a premises liability case, rather than one side assuming all responsibility for a personal injury or damage incurred as a result of negligent maintenance or supervision.

The Court will limit how much each party can be held liable for based on the percentage each is determined at fault. So if the property owner was found 80% liable and you 20%, then only 80% of your damages would be recoverable from that party – leaving 20% unaccounted for.

How Is the Degree of Fault or Blame Determined in A Premises Liability Case?

When it comes to premises liability claims in Florida, it's important to understand how the degree of fault or blame is determined. Generally speaking, a property owner is liable for any injuries within the premises if it can be proven that the property owner knew or should have known about a dangerous condition and failed to take reasonable steps to remediate or warn of it.

In a premises liability case in Florida, the courts will determine the percentage of fault or blame based on four key factors:

  • The claimant's level of responsibility for the accident
  • The degree to which the defendant had control over the area where the incident occurred
  • Whether or not either party took any mitigating measures before the incident
  • The physical conditions at the time of the incident

The court will also consider any evidence that either supports or refutes a negligence claim—for example, if there was a warning sign posted but ignored by the claimant, that could affect how much fault falls on them.

Ultimately, it's up to each case and its respective circumstances—which is why it's important for someone filing a premises liability claim in Florida to consult with an experienced lawyer who can help guide them through their options and get them the compensation they deserve.

Can A Plaintiff Still Recover Damages If They Are Partially at Fault for A Premises Liability Incident?

Yes, a plaintiff can still recover damages if they are partially at fault for a premises liability incident in Florida. This is due to the comparative negligence rule in the state of Florida. Under this rule, if a plaintiff is found to be partially at fault for an incident, their percentage of fault will be subtracted from any damages that may be awarded to them.

For example, if a plaintiff is found to be 20% at fault and is awarded $10,000 in damages by a jury, they would then receive only $8,000 after their percentage of fault was considered.

This means that you may still be able to recover damages from a premises liability incident even if you contributed in some way to the cause of the incident. It is important to note, however, that if you are deemed to be more than 50% responsible for the incident, you will not be able to recover any damages.

Can A Plaintiff Be Barred from Recovery If They Are Found to Be at Fault for A Premises Liability Incident?

You might be wondering: what if I'm partially responsible for a premises liability incident? Can I still collect the damages? Unfortunately, in many cases, the answer is no. Under Florida's comparative negligence law, the "comparative fault" of the plaintiff influences what kind of damages—if any—will be awarded.

Comparative Negligence Law
In Florida, an injured party can recover damages as long as they are not more than 50 percent at fault for the accident. They will be barred from collecting anything if they are found to be at least 50 percent at fault or more.

Let's say you are injured on someone's property and sue them in court. In a trial, a jury will assign percentages of fault to both you and the property owner. If it is found that you are more than 50 percent responsible for your accident, then your case will likely be dismissed, and you will not receive any compensation from the property owner.

This doesn't always happen—it all depends on how much fault is attributed to each party in court—but it could happen if you're found to share some responsibility for your accident.

How Can the Actions of a Property Owner or Occupier Be Used to Assign Blame in A Premises Liability Case?

If you're considering filing a premises liability claim in Florida, it's important to know if the property owner or occupier had a hand in causing the harm that occurred. Generally speaking, for a business owner or occupier to be liable for an accident on their property, three conditions must be met:

  • The injured person was owed a duty of care (to provide a safe environment)
  • It can be proven that the duty of care was breached (by failing to maintain safe conditions)
  • As a result of this breach, the injured person suffered harm

It's also helpful to know that in Florida, specifically when it comes to determining whether or not a business owner or occupier is liable for an injury on their property, four different factors can be taken into consideration:

  • The activity taking place at the time
  • The extent and seriousness of any mistakes made by either party
  • Any action was taken by either party in relation to the incident
  • Any known dangerous conditions onsite

With these factors in mind, it will become much clearer whether or not you have grounds to file a successful premises liability claim in Florida.

Can A Plaintiff's Conduct Be Used to Assign Blame in A Premises Liability Case?

You might not know that a plaintiff's conduct can be used in assigning blame in a premises liability case.

Under Florida law, comparative negligence is a legal principle which assigns blame to the plaintiff if they are found partly responsible for their injuries. This means that, even if the property owner is deemed liable, your award can be reduced depending on the extent to which you contributed to your accident and injuries.

For example, if you slip and fall due to wet floors in a store, but it is found that you were texting at the time of your fall and not paying attention, you could be held accountable. In this instance, the amount you receive in damages will likely be reduced because of your contributory negligence.

In general, the doctrine of comparative negligence applies in Florida premises liability cases; however, this principle is only applied when both parties are found guilty of negligence to some extent. The comparative negligence doctrine may not be allowed if one party (property owner or plaintiff) is found guilty of gross or willful negligence.

Can A Defendant Argue That the Plaintiff Assumed the Risk of Injury in A Premises Liability Case?

Yes, a defendant can argue that the plaintiff assumed the risk of injury at the premises. In other words, a defendant can argue that they had no duty to protect the plaintiff from an injury because the plaintiff voluntarily put themselves in a dangerous or unsafe situation and accepted any risk of harm that may come from it.

If the defendant can establish that the plaintiff had assumed the risk of injury, then any claim for damages will likely be unsuccessful. This is why potential plaintiffs need to understand their rights and know what to expect before filing a premises liability claim in Florida.

Typically, assuming the risk means that:

  • The plaintiff was aware of potential dangers at the property
  • The plaintiff voluntarily and knowingly disregarded those dangers
  • The danger posed by those risks caused their injuries

It's important to note that even if a plaintiff has assumed some risk, they may still be entitled to compensation if they can prove that the property owner failed to fulfil their duty of care or acted with negligence.

Can A Plaintiff's Prior Knowledge of a Hazard Be Used to Assign Blame in A Premises Liability Case?

When filing a premises liability claim in Florida, one factor that might come into play is the victim's prior knowledge of the hazard. This can be an important consideration when assigning blame in a case.

So, can a plaintiff's prior knowledge of a hazard be used to assign blame in a premises liability case ?

The answer is that it depends on the type of hazard involved and the circumstances surrounding the incident. In some cases, a plaintiff's prior knowledge may be considered when assigning blame, but ultimately it will depend on the facts of each case.

For example, if a plaintiff knowingly enters an area that contains an obvious danger, such as an open manhole or a broken stair rail, then their prior knowledge may be used to assign blame for their actions or injuries.

On the other hand, if a hazard were not immediately visible or known about by the victim before entering an area, then their prior knowledge would likely not be taken into account when assigning blame in a premises liability case.

How Can an Attorney Assist with Assigning Blame in A Premises Liability Case?

When you've been injured because of a property owner's negligence, figuring out who is liable can be tricky. It's important to understand that in some cases, more than one party may be liable for your injury. That's why having an experienced attorney on your side throughout the process is so crucial.

A good attorney can help you determine who should be accountable for your injuries. They'll also look at all of the relevant evidence to establish liability and represent you on your behalf in court. There are many factors they'll need to consider, including:

  • The nature and severity of the hazard or defect on the property
  • The degree of care taken by the property owner to address any issues
  • The foreseeability of the harm caused by the hazard or defect
  • Previous incidents involving similar hazards or defects
  • Any applicable statutes or ordinances
  • Any warnings are given before the incident occurred
  • Any evidence that someone other than the property owner created or maintained the hazard or defect
Contact Frankl Kominsky Injury Lawyers - Premises Liability Lawyers Serving Royal Palm Beach

You need to take action quickly when you've been injured in a slip and fall or other incident on someone else's property in Florida. Contact Frankl Kominsky Injury Lawyers - premise liability lawyers serving Royal Palm Beach. Our experienced premises liability attorneys will investigate the details of your accident, gather evidence, and help you build a strong liability case against the property owner.

At Frankl Kominsky Injury Lawyers, we understand how to handle Florida's complex premises liability laws and have successfully represented hundreds of injured clients due to a property owner's negligence. We are dedicated to protecting your rights, fighting for the best outcome possible, and helping you get compensated for your medical bills and lost wages due to the accident.

Our goal is to get you the compensation you need as soon as possible to move forward with your life after a traumatic experience. Don't wait any longer—contact Frankl Kominsky Injury Lawyers - premises liability lawyers serving Royal Palm Beach at (561) 800-8000 today for compassionate assistance!

Client Reviews
I have had experience in the past using other attorneys and law firms however the attorneys and staff at Frankl Kominsky are by far the best experience I have ever had. Thank you for everything this law firm has done. I recommend this law firm to everyone. By Bruce
This was an amazing injury law firm. Steven and his staff was available when I needed him and were always following up with me. I felt very fortunate that I found them. It is true that this law firm will never settle for less! I fully recommend this law firm to anyone that needs a hardworking and results oriented law firm. By Consuelo
Mr. Frankl came very highly recommended by two separate peers. I had a handful of lawyers to choose from and I chose him. He moved quick, no nonsense, and very effective. Before I knew it everything was handled and I had a serious burden lifted. If I ever have a problem again, I am going straight to him. It is that simple. By Kelly
I called Mr. Frankl and his firm about a motorcycle accident case and he helped me through the entire process. Mr. Frankl made me feel like my situation mattered to him and didn't treatment me like just another file in a file cabinet. He is smart, energetic and a true fighter. I am glad to call him my lawyer and I highly recommend Frankl Kominsky for your personal injury case. By A Personal Injury Client
Mr. Frankl was such an asset to have on my team while I picked up the pieces following an accident. Right from the beginning he assisted handling the insurance companies, rental car companies, auto body shops, police reports, it was incredible. His guidance allowed me to focus on the most important thing and that was my medical condition & recovery. Should you find yourself in this unfortunate situation do yourself a favor & trust this man & his expertise. By Damon