Articles Posted in Premises Liability

If you are injured in a trip and fall accident on someone else’s property, you may have a premises liability claim for damages against the persons responsible for the property where the accident happened. At Maurer Law, our seasoned team of Charlotte trip and fall lawyers have handled numerous claims on behalf of individuals who wound up with serious injuries and expenses because the property owner failed to keep the property in a safe condition. We are available to assist you in exploring your right to compensation.

Recently, the North Carolina Court of Appeal was asked to decide whether a jury properly found that a plaintiff in a trip and fall case was contributorily negligent in causing her injuries. The plaintiff tripped and fell at the Blue Ridge Shopping Mall in Hendersonville in an area of its parking lot where an energy company had performed maintenance on utility lines beneath the surface. The patched area was roughly a half-inch lower than the surrounding parking lot surface.

The plaintiff parked her vehicle in a parking spot next to the patched area and tripped on the edge. She alleged in her complaint that because it was a sunny day, shadows obscured the edge and made it impossible to see. She suffered a concussion and fractured left knee as a result of the fall requiring a total knee replacement among other treatments.

Continue reading

Most people know that suffering a slip and fall accident on someone else’s property may entitle you to compensation from the owner for your injuries and damages. When the owner of the property is a government entity, however, there are many additional rules that apply to how you must go about asserting your claim. The compassionate and responsive Charlotte premises liability lawyers at Maurer Law are available to assist you with investigating your claim and ensuring that you protect your rights.

In a recent case, the North Carolina Court of Appeal was asked to consider whether a lower court properly granted summary judgment in favor of a city in a slip and fall accident. The accident took place at a building that the city had purchased from the county in an attempt to revitalize its downtown area. It leased the property to nonprofit art groups. The lease stated that the defendant was responsible for maintaining the exterior of the building and had the right to inspect it from time to time.

The plaintiff was one of the subtenants leasing the building at the time the accident occurred. She was carrying a large stack of pictures through a rear exit of the building when she lost her balance on a set of stairs and fell. Evidence in the record suggested that the concrete material that comprised the steps had eroded. She suffered a broken hip and other injuries as a result of the fall. The plaintiff filed a claim against the city as the owner of the building.

Continue reading

If you are injured on another person’s property, you can bring a premises liability claim to recover compensation for your injuries and damages. North Carolina law places certain duties on landowners to ensure that different types of guests are protected from dangers on the property. The level of duty to warn or remedy a dangerous condition that a landowner owes to you depends on the reason that you are visiting the property. As such, premises liability cases can become complicated. The compassionate Charlotte premises liability lawyers at Maurer Law are available to discuss your potential case and how we can assist you.

Recently, the North Carolina Court of Appeal issued an opinion in a case involving a trip and fall injury. The plaintiff was attending a funeral at the defendant’s church. The defendant’s employees asked the plaintiff if he would be able to assist with carrying a casket as part of the ceremony. The plaintiff agreed. He followed the employees through the building, down a flight of steps, and out a back door. The plaintiff and three others carried the casket through the same doorway. The plaintiff was walking sideways to account for the casket when he tripped as he attempted to cross the threshold.

The trial court granted summary judgment for the defendant in the plaintiff’s lawsuit seeking damages. The trial court concluded that the nature of the danger, the steps leading in and out of the doorway, were open and obvious. It noted that the plaintiff had only moments before traveled through the same doorway when exiting the church to retrieve the casket. The plaintiff appealed and a divided panel of the Court of Appeals reversed. It concluded that there were genuine issues of fact regarding whether the nature of the steps leading into the building was an open and obvious danger.

Continue reading

Under North Carolina law, property owners have a duty to ensure that their premises are reasonably safe for guests. When a property owner fails to abide by this duty, the outcome can be seriously painful or even fatal for an unknowing visitor. If you were injured on someone else’s property, you may have a claim for compensation against the owner of the property as well as the person who was in control of the premises. At Maurer Law, our seasoned team of Charlotte premises liability attorneys is prepared to assist you with ensuring that you receive the compensation that you deserve.

Recently, the North Carolina Court of Appeal considered a case involving a woman who was injured on a set of bleachers at a college baseball game. According to her complaint, when she stood up from her seat and began to move one of the wooden slats in the flooring caught her foot and caused her to lose her balance. She fell down the bleachers as a result of this situation and suffered severe and permanent injuries including a broken back. The plaintiff had no memory of the fall due to suffering memory loss as a result of the impact.

The defendant responded to her complaint by denying that it was liable and alleging that the plaintiff acted negligently and was, therefore, the primary cause of her injuries. The defendant moved for summary judgment, which the lower court granted. The plaintiff promptly appealed.

Continue reading

If you are injured on someone else’s property, you may be entitled to compensation for your injuries and damages if you can show that the property owner did not exercise appropriate care in preventing your injury. This may sound straightforward, but a premises liability lawsuit can become complex especially if there is a dispute about exactly what happened and whether the injury was foreseeable. As Charlotte premises liability lawyers, Maurer Law is ready to assist you with determining whether you have a right to compensation after suffering an avoidable and unnecessary injury.

Recently, the North Carolina Court of Appeal issued an opinion in a case involving an injury that happened in a private residence. The plaintiff in the case entered the home of the defendant for a party. The plaintiff went to a covered patio area and sat down to talk with other guests. Plaintiff was sitting near a step that was roughly six and one-half inches down leading to a lower patio area. The plaintiff got up from her seat after finishing speaking with the guests and fell almost instantly after attempting to walk away from her chair. She landed on her wrist and had to undergo surgery to repair the damage.

The plaintiff’s lawsuit against the defendant alleged that the concrete step was unmarked and that because it was the same color as both patio levels it was difficult to see. She also alleged that the defendant failed to warn guests at the party about the hazardous nature of the step and that the defendant had considered painting the step another color or placing a railing next to it.

Continue reading

When it comes to accidents that are due to another person’s negligence, slip and fall cases are one of the most common ways that Charlotte residents can find themselves experiencing serious harm and inconvenience in their lives. The rules regarding premises liability injuries are somewhat complicated, which is why it is important to have a diligent Charlotte personal injury attorney to assist you with all phases of your claim including ensuring that you receive the full amount of compensation that you are owed.

In a recent claim, the plaintiff appealed an order granting summary judgment for the defendant property owner. The plaintiff sued the property owner after reportedly tripping on a crate of tomatoes that was allegedly protruding into the shopping aisle, according to the plaintiff’s complaint. The defendant based its motion for summary judgment on the theory that the danger was open and obvious and that the defendant is not liable under premises liability law for open and obvious dangers.

A negligence claim requires the plaintiff to show that the defendant owed him or her a duty, failed to exercise appropriate care according to that duty and that the breach was the direct and foreseeable cause of any injuries that the plaintiff sustained. Under North Carolina law, a property owner owes all lawful visitors a duty to act with reasonable care. When it comes to a business owner, that duty requires the owner to ensure that the premises is reasonably safe and to provide warnings about any hidden dangers or unsafe conditions that are capable of being identified during a reasonable inspection.

Continue reading

One of the most common activities for families with children is to take their kids to the park. When city officials fail to maintain a public park in a safe condition, however, the children can face devastating injuries or even death. If you or your child were injured on public property, you may be entitled to compensation for your injuries and expenses. Bringing a premises liability lawsuit against a government entity can be more complex due to statutes providing government officials with immunity from liability in some instances. Contact our Charlotte premises liability lawyers today to start learning about your potential case.

Recently, the North Carolina Court of Appeal considered a case in which a child who was 18 months old suffered severe burn injuries when he fell on a metal skate park ramp that had become hot from sun exposure. The parents brought a complaint against the city that maintains the skate park and the manufacturer of the metal ramp alleging that the metal ramp was a dangerous condition and that the city and the manufacturer failed to provide a warning that the metal ramp could become dangerously hot due to sun exposure.

The manufacturer filed an answer asserting several affirmative defenses, including intervening negligence of a third party, the babysitter who was supervising the minor at the skate park. The city raised similar defenses and alleged that the plaintiffs did not establish a viable claim against the city. The city later filed a motion to dismiss on the basis that it was entitled to immunity under N.C. Gen. Stat. section 99E-21, et seq., and that the plaintiff’s complaint failed to establish negligence or gross negligence on the part of the city. The lower court granted the motion and the plaintiffs appealed.

In certain situations, a property owner has a duty to protect you from dangers that may be caused by third-parties, such as people committing criminal acts. This type of liability can be tricky, especially when it is not clear whether the property owner owed you a duty to protect you or whether the harm that you received was foreseeable. At Maurer Law, our seasoned team of Charlotte personal injury lawyers has handled a number of premises liability cases and we are ready to assist you in determining whether you are owed compensation for your injuries.

In a recent case, the plaintiff was a student at a university who was the victim of a prank in the dormitory. A group of students placed a cup of water above the plaintiff’s door so that it would spill on the plaintiff when he opened the door. The plaintiff confronted the group of students about the prank and the interaction became violent. Five students were suspended as a result of the altercation and the plaintiff along with his roommate were moved to another dorm. Eventually, the plaintiff withdrew from the university and enrolled elsewhere.

The plaintiff later filed a lawsuit against the university and its Board of Trustees, alleging that the university negligently caused the plaintiff to experience emotional distress and sought punitive damages for its alleged willful and wanton disregard for the plaintiff’s rights. The university moved for summary judgment and the lower court granted the motion. The plaintiff appealed on the basis that he had established that the university owed him a duty of care and failed to act according to that duty, and that he suffered damages as a direct and foreseeable result of that failure.

Continue reading

Accidents can happen anywhere, including public places. When it comes to suing an entity for injuries that you sustained in a slip and fall accident, in general, you must prove that the defendant knew or should have known that a dangerous condition existed on the property and that it failed to make the condition safe or to provide a warning. At Maurer Law, our seasoned team of Asheville personal injury lawyers is prepared to help you explore whether you are entitled to compensation and the best way to go about securing the settlement or judgment that you deserve. We know how overwhelming this situation can be for you and your family, especially if you are suffering from painful injuries. Don’t wait to contact us because time may be running out on your claim.

In a recent case, the plaintiff alleged that she suffered injuries when she fell at an aquarium in Pine Knoll Shores during a Halloween-themed event. She required a hip replacement as a result of the fall. In her complaint, the plaintiff alleged that the defendant was negligent in failing to maintain the common areas of the property and in failing to warn people about the presence of a dangerous condition. The defendant denied the allegations and argued that the plaintiff was contributorily negligent. Initially, the assigned Commissioner concluded that the defendant was negligent, and that the plaintiff was not contributorily negligent. It awarded the plaintiff damages in the amount of roughly $72,000.

The defendant appealed the matter to the Full Commission, which reversed on the basis that the plaintiff failed to prove that the defendant knew or should have known that a dangerous condition existed on the premises.

Continue reading