How To Prove A Texas Slip and Fall (Premises Liability) Claim

 

 

In Texas, a claim of Slip and Fall (Premises Liability) is defined as:

A slip and fall claim occurs when a property owner fails to keep his or her property safe for lawful visitors, resulting in injury to a visitor. (May also be referred to as Premises Liability)

It simply means:

An injury claim arising from an injury on someone’s property.

There are 4 elements of the claim:

• Element 1. There was actual or constructive knowledge of a condition on the premises by the owner or operator. For a slip and fall claim, it must be shown that the property owner or manager either knew about a dangerous condition on their property or should have known about it, meaning they had a reasonable opportunity to fix it before someone got hurt.
  

  Facts that might support this element look like:

  * The owner received multiple complaints from customers about a wet floor in the entrance area prior to the incident.
  * Surveillance footage shows that the owner’s employees walked past the spill several times without addressing it.
  * Maintenance logs indicate that the area where the fall occurred had not been inspected for over a week.
  * The owner had previously been cited for similar slip and fall incidents in the same location.
  * The floor mat used in the entrance was worn and had been reported as a tripping hazard by staff.

• Element 2. The condition posed an unreasonable risk of harm. In a slip and fall case, “the condition posed an unreasonable risk of harm” means that the dangerous situation, like a wet floor or broken step, was so risky that it should have been fixed or clearly marked to prevent people from getting hurt.
  

  Facts that might support this element look like:

  * The floor was wet and lacked any warning signs, creating a hazardous environment for patrons.
  * The store had received multiple complaints about the slippery condition prior to the incident, indicating awareness of the risk.
  * The lighting in the area was inadequate, making it difficult for customers to see the dangerous condition.
  * The substance on the floor was a known hazard, and the store had a history of similar incidents without taking corrective action.
  * Employees were observed ignoring the spill for an extended period, demonstrating negligence in maintaining a safe environment.

• Element 3. The owner or operator did not exercise reasonable care to reduce or eliminate the risk. This means that the property owner or manager didn’t take the necessary steps to keep the area safe, like fixing hazards or warning people about dangers, which led to someone getting hurt from slipping or falling.
  

  Facts that might support this element look like:

  * The owner failed to repair a known leak in the ceiling, which caused water to accumulate on the floor for several days.
  * The operator neglected to place warning signs around a freshly mopped area, despite being aware of the potential hazard.
  * The property owner did not conduct regular inspections of the premises, allowing hazardous conditions to persist without correction.
  * The operator ignored multiple complaints from customers about a slippery floor, demonstrating a lack of attention to safety concerns.
  * The owner allowed debris to accumulate in high-traffic areas, creating an unsafe environment for patrons.

• Element 4. The owner or operator’s failure to use such care proximately caused the plaintiff’s injuries. The owner or operator didn’t take proper care of their property, and this lack of attention directly led to the injuries the person suffered in the slip and fall accident.
  

  Facts that might support this element look like:

  * The property owner was aware of the wet floor but failed to place warning signs to alert customers.
  * The operator neglected to clean up a spill for over an hour, despite multiple complaints from patrons.
  * Surveillance footage shows that the owner walked past the hazardous area without taking any action to address it.
  * The plaintiff slipped and fell immediately after stepping onto the wet floor, indicating a direct link to the owner’s negligence.
  * Maintenance records reveal that the owner had not conducted routine safety inspections for several months prior to the incident.

^{(See Corbin v. Safeway Stores, Inc., 648 SW 2d 292 – Tex: Supreme Court 1983.)}
If you’re representing yourself in court for a Claim of Slip and Fall (Premises Liability), having a Personal Practice of Law at Courtroom5 is essential. You’ll need to make informed decisions about what to file at each phase of your case and prepare legal documents that are supported by thorough legal research and a strong analysis of the facts. Equip yourself with the tools and knowledge to navigate your case effectively.

Prove Your TX Slip and Fall (Premises Liability) Claim

U.S. Civil Cases Only