An attorney who practices in the personal injury field will wear many hats during the course of their career, and often in the course of a case.  He or she must be a confidant, financial advisor, grief counselor, accountant, therapist, and every once in a while a detective.  Of the myriad variety of personal injury lawsuits that one encounters, “trip and fall” or “slip and fall” cases are typically the most vehemently defended, the most challenging in terms of gathering evidence, and the most difficult to settle.  There is a bias amongst defense attorneys, insurance companies, and the public at large, that if people simply watched where they were going, they wouldn’t have fallen!  While this type of generalization is often grossly unfair, detecting exactly why a reasonably prudent person could have fallen at a given spot is often difficult.

Take, for example, a recent case involving a very nice gentleman, “Mr. P”.   Mr. P was staying at a well known national hotel chain, and had fallen down a flight of stairs.  Liability was, of course, contested.  While the case ultimately settled for what all felt was a very favorable outcome in the low six figures, convincing the hotel owner and his insurer that the stairs, and not Mr. P, was at fault proved very difficult.  First, there was a lighting issue.   Mr. P was adamant that the light was out at the time of the accident.  Photographs taken shortly after the accident confirmed a light was out, but for how long?  And did the owner of the hotel know about it?  In slip and fall cases, a property defect must reasonably have been known by the landowner in time to remedy or make the area safe.  Thus if a sink hole formed moments before a guest arrived at your home, and you did not know about the sink hole, then no liability would be assessed against the landowner.

In Mr. P’s case, after tracking down ex-employees, we discovered that the light at the bottom of the stairs had been out for over one year prior to the accident, and that the employees were well aware of this.

But, lighting alone is often not enough to successfully resolve a “trip and fall” case.  The defense asserted that other lighting that was working would be sufficient to illuminate the stairs, and Mr. P should have been more careful in a darkened stairwell.  They were preparing to go to trial.

After inspecting the scene, the litigating attorney, Michael Bock, decided that something about the steps didn’t feel quite right.  Our office retained an expert, and  discussed with him our specific concerns.  Mr. P had mentioned the steps felt steep, and slanted.  Our expert concurred.  After an inspection of the blue prints (which required some help from a friendly city clerk), we Mr. Bock and our expert went back out to the hotel.  They discovered that the builder had actually installed the wrong pre-fabricated stairwell.  The steps were not only too steep and in violation of acceptable building practices, but they actually sloped downwards.  The entire stairwell was not up to code.

While this case and investigation has been simplified down to a few paragraphs, tracking down ex-employees, obtaining and deciphering blue-prints, and knowing what tests to run, is a labor and time intensive process.  When looking for a California slip and fall attorney to handle cases involving premises liability, make sure you have an attorney dedicated to following every lead.  It is the deposition not taken, the photograph not examined, and the test not run that all too often costs the Plaintiff their meritorious claim.

Mr. P was very happy with his claim resolution and we will continue to help clients “Soar Above”, not just survive an accident. Michael Bock is a seven year veteran of litigation in complex cases.  Congratulations to a job well done.