California Slip & Call Cases: Did the Property Owner Act Reasonably?

This week, we have been discussing how California premises liability cases are decided. An important aspect of many slip and fall cases is whether the property owner acted with reasonable care regarding his or her property. But, what exactly is the definition of ‘reasonable’? The answer is at the center of a large number of slip and fall lawsuits.

Very simply, a reasonable property owner takes care of his or her property. While he might not closely inspect his property with a magnifying glass, he does take sensible, practical, and realistic measures to keep visitors on his property safe.

A reasonable property owner might:

• Have a schedule for checking and maintaining his property.
• Require an employee to check the property for dangers in a regular and systematic way.
• Have a protocol for when hazards are reported on the property.
• Be aware of logical possible dangers on his property.
• Place a warning sign or temporary barrier near hazards which cannot be fixed immediately.

An unreasonable and negligent property owner might:

• Ignore reports of an existing hazard on the property.
• Neglect to regularly inspect the property for issues.
• Place objects in dangerous or unexpected places.
• Neglect to warn visitors of known dangers on the property.
• Not act in a timely manner when a hazard is reported on the property.

All slip and fall cases are different, and all outcomes depend on the specific evidence in each case. If you or a loved one has been injured in a slip and fall accident in California, you may wish to discuss your case with an Orange County premises liability attorney. Call Russell & Lazarus at (949) 851-0222 to schedule a free, confidential consultation.