Property owners and occupiers face constant exposure to claims of injury occurring on their premises. At Waldon Adelman Castilla McNamara & Prout, our Premises Liability practice is dedicated to defending businesses, landowners, landlords, homeowners, and their insurers against allegations of unsafe conditions leading to accidents and injuries. We understand the critical importance of a prompt and thorough investigation to protect our clients’ interests. Our attorneys provide aggressive and effective defense strategies to minimize our clients’ exposure and achieve favorable resolutions in premises liability disputes.

Understanding Premises Liability Claims

Premises liability is a legal area where a property owner or occupier may be held responsible for an injury that occurs on their property. These cases typically hinge on whether the owner had a duty of care to the injured party and whether a dangerous condition on the property was the cause of the injury. Our attorneys handle a wide range of premises liability claims, including:

• Slip-and-fall and trip-and-fall accidents
• Injuries caused by falling objects
• Dog bites and animal attacks
• Claims of inadequate security leading to assault or other crime (which often overlaps with our Negligent Security practice)

We understand the complex legal nuances of these cases and meticulously examine all circumstances surrounding the incident.

A Strategic Defense to Negligence Claims

To build a strategic defense, our attorneys move quickly to investigate the incident. We meticulously examine key factors, including the plaintiff’s conduct, the owner’s knowledge (actual or constructive) of any alleged dangerous condition, and the overall state of the premises.

We challenge claims of negligence by asserting appropriate defenses, such as:

• Open and Obvious Dangers: Arguing that the hazard was so apparent that the plaintiff should have avoided it.
• Comparative Negligence: Demonstrating that the plaintiff’s own actions contributed to their injury.
• Lack of Notice: Proving that our client had no knowledge, and no reasonable way of knowing, about the alleged dangerous condition.
• Absence of a Duty of Care: Establishing that our client did not owe a legal duty to the injured party under the circumstances.

Our strategic approach and tenacious advocacy have led to significant victories for our clients, as showcased in this case: Castilla Sways Jury to Apportion Blame, Limit Damages in Complex Wrongful Death Case.