Punitive Damages Against the Land Owner in Premises Liability Cases

One kind of injury cases in which claimants and their attorney miss on a significant elements of recovery is potential punitive damages in a premises liability case. Imagine a situation, where a claimant trips and falls on a condition a property that has been existing for a while, and as to which the land owner has been alerted several times in the past. The owner failed to take any action to fix the condition for one reason of the other, which lead to the subject injury.    

Under the law, punitive damages are available in premises liability cases, where the client can show that the defendant-owner performs or fails to perform an act that he know or should know will probably cause harm. Nolin v. National Conveniences Stores, Inc. (1979)  In Nolin, the court found that the defendant's inattention to slip-and-fall danger "reflected defendant's overriding concern for a minimum expenses operation, regardless of the risks involved". Likewise, in Stoiber v Honeychuck (1980), the court concluded that the plaintiff was able to support her punitive damages allegations where she alleged that the defendant had actual knowledge of defective conditions in the premises, including leaking sewage, deteriorated flooring, failing ceiling, leaking roof, broken windows, and other unsafe and dangerous conditions. 

It is often worth conducting at least a minimal investigation in a slip and fall / trip and fall cases where a claim for punitive damages can be made. The first step should be finding out whether prior similar complaints or notice of the condition were given to the land owner or their agents, and what, if anything, they have done to remedy those issues. 

---