Slip & Fall

Personal Injury Jury Instructions

PERSONAL INJURY JURY INSTRUCTIONS When considering how much to demand for a personal injury, your accident attorney will review the amount of damage that you have incurred, and will continue to incur in the future. Medical bills, lost wages, and future medical bills are examples of the types of damage that is recoverable. Insurance adjusters are not considering the types of instructions levied to the Jury, but attorneys should when contemplating the types of compensation that will or could be awarded. § 501.1 Personal Injury and Property Damages When it is proven during a trial that Defendant is liable for the accident, the Court instructs the Jury write on the verdict form, in dollars, the total amount of loss, injury, or damage which the greater weight of the evidence shows will fairly and adequately compensate him or her for the loss, injury, or damage, including any damages that he or she is reasonably certain to […]

By | 2017-05-18T18:53:16+00:00 August 6th, 2014|Car Accident, Civil Litigation, Personal Injury, Slip & Fall|Comments Off on Personal Injury Jury Instructions

Slip & Fall Attorney Review of Ramsey v. Home Depot

Slip & Fall Attorney Review of Ramsey v. Home Depot Virtually everyone has visited a business and said “somebody is going to get hurt” from a dangerous condition.  Diving a little deeper, you may have wondered whether the owner would be liable if somebody actually becomes injured.  Your slip & fall attorney will first determine whether the danger is concealed or open and obvious.  If the danger is concealed, then the business owner has a duty to warn the public of the hidden danger, but only if the business itself knew or should have known of the concealed danger.  Alternatively, a business can be held liable for injuries that result from a failure to use ordinary care to maintain its premises in a reasonably safe condition. Open and Obvious Hazard In Florida, while a business owes a duty to maintain their premises in a reasonably safe condition, there is no duty to warn against an open and obvious condition which is not inherently dangerous.[1]  However, liability is always apportioned according to fault.  Thus, even when the danger is open and obvious, an injured party may still argue whether the condition was dangerous and whether the owner or occupier of the land should have anticipated that the dangerous condition would cause injury, despite that the danger was open and obvious.[2] Facts In the instant case, Gudrun Ramsey was shopping at Home Depot.  After shopping, she returned to the parking lot and tripped on a wheel stop that is common place in many parking lots.  Ramsey sued home depot for negligence claiming that home depot breached its duty to maintain the premises in a reasonably safe condition, and also breached its duty to warn of any dangerous, [...]

By | 2017-05-18T18:53:17+00:00 February 7th, 2014|Slip & Fall|Comments Off on Slip & Fall Attorney Review of Ramsey v. Home Depot