Most personal injury attorneys are well aware of the distinction between a premises liability claim and a traditional negligence claim: Premises liability claims stem from a condition of the property while negligence claims require “contemporaneous negligent activity.” Though there can be some hair-splitting between the two sorts of claims, defense attorneys generally prefer to charge juries on premises liability since it requires a plaintiff to prove: 1. the condition of the property posed an unreasonable risk of harm; 2. the defendant knew or should have known of the condition; and 3. the defendant failed to adequately warn of the condition (or otherwise make it safe). Summary judgments are common in the area, as are directed verdicts.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law are third party online distributors of the broad collection of current and archived versions of ALM's legal news publications. LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law customers are able to access and use ALM's content, including content from the National Law Journal, The American Lawyer, Legaltech News, The New York Law Journal, and Corporate Counsel, as well as other sources of legal information.
For questions call 1-877-256-2472 or contact us at [email protected]
