Published on:

Injured Worker Uses New York Premises Liability Law to Pursue Property Owner for His Injuries

The law of premises liability can apply in a variety of different situations. A premises liability case can arise from a shopper’s trip (or slip) and fall in a store. It can emerge from a tenant’s tripping or falling while on the property owned by the landlord. It can also potentially happen when a worker is injured on the job. Regardless of the origin, if you’ve been hurt while on property owned by someone else due to a hazardous condition on that property, you may be entitled to compensation. To learn more about your case, contact a skilled New York premises liability attorney soon.

A example of the last of the three hypothetical injuries listed above happened to a Westchester County worker in the summer of 2013. Richard was working on a mechanical system at a large shopping mall in downtown White Plains. Richard’s job required him to get on the roof of the mall, which was accomplished via a small set of wooden stairs. As Richard was getting back down those stairs, one of the steps allegedly cracked and forced the worker to jump off the staircase to avoid falling. The result of the jump left Richard with substantial injuries, so he sued the mall owner for his damages.

Although Richard was a worker at the mall site, he pursued his lawsuit under the legal theory of premises liability. This allows various types of people whom the law calls “invitees” to recover compensation for hazards on a landowner’s property. Whether you are a worker at a shopping mall or a personal guest at a private home, you may be entitled to compensation if you were hurt because the property owner failed to keep up the property and allowed a hazardous condition to exist.

In any type of civil case, one of the major hurdles you will face is defeating your opposition’s motion for summary judgment. If the court awards summary judgment to the defense, you lose your case without ever even getting to present your evidence at trial.

In Richard’s case, he was able to clear this summary judgment hurdle and proceed to trial. According to the Appellate Division’s ruling, his evidence was enough to raise the possibility that the mall owner had constructive notice of the hazardous state of the stairs. In order to be entitled to a summary judgment, a property owner has to give the court evidence related to when the area in question was last cleaned or inspected. The mall owner in Richard’s case didn’t have that proof. Without any evidence from the owner regarding the inspection of the stairs, Richard still had a viable argument that the owner had constructive notice about the hazardous stair.

If you have been hurt because of a dangerous condition on someone else’s property, reach out to the experienced Queens premises liability attorneys at Newman, Anzalone & Newman. Our team has been aiding injured people for four decades in pursuing fair compensation for the damages they suffered. To put our experience to work for you, schedule a free consultation with one of our qualified attorneys. Contact us toll-free at 877-754-3099 or through our website.

More Blog Posts:

What to Do When You’re Injured in Your New York Apartment Due to Improper Maintenance or Repair, New York Personal Injury Lawyers Blog, May 16, 2018

The Legal Concept of ‘Notice’ and What It Means to Winning Your New York Sidewalk Accident Case, New York Personal Injury Lawyers Blog, Feb. 13, 2018

Contact Information