Slip, trip, and fall cases in California rely on negligence, duty of care, and comparative fault rules. See how liability is proven, what defenses landowners raise, and why the two-year filing limit can end claims.
By Brad Nakase, Attorney
Email | Call (888) 600-8654
Have a quick question? I answered nearly 1500 FAQs.
You were shopping as usual. Then your foot hit a wet spot, and you fell. Or the uneven surface on your neighbor’s front path caused you to trip and fall. You may be considering filing a claim with your insurance company or a slip and fall suit to get compensation (also known as damages) for your harm if you were injured in a trip and fall or slip and fall incident, like one of these.
You’re where you should be. We guide you through the components of a slip and fall claim in California, concentrating primarily on the question of fault—who is legally accountable for your injuries. In addition, we will discuss the statute of limitations, potential landowner arguments, and a lot more.
The foundation of slip and fall and trip and fall cases in California is negligence law. Negligence is not exercising the level of caution that the situation demands. A slip and fall lawsuit is created when landowner negligence is combined with injuries and causation. People often ask, “Is a slip or trip an accident or a crime?” The answer depends on negligence.
Landowners and other individuals in charge of real estate, such as tenants, contractors, managers of properties, & easement owners (collectively referred to as “owners” or “landowners”), are required by law to manage and maintain their property with reasonable care. However, that legal obligation is reciprocal. The other side (the party you are suing) usually swings around and points back at you when you raise a finger at them.
For you to establish the negligence of a landowner in California, you need to demonstrate that:
The first two components are what the law refers to as negligence. The duty of care & the disregard of that duty. Both are strongly disputed in a normal slip and fall scenario.
Must Read: Vicarious Liability in California: Laws, Examples, and How It Applies
“Duty of care” is a requirement. It outlines that a landowner must ensure that guests are reasonably safe on their property. This is the bare minimum you must do to escape legal liability for accidents that occur on your property.
There is a duty of care in California slip and fall lawsuits when:
A landowner in California is generally required under the duty of care to take “ordinary” or appropriate measures to ensure that their real estate is sufficiently secure for guests.
What would that mean, though? What must the property owner actually do to meet this requirement? There is no universally applicable response to that query. In any event, the form of the obligation is determined by the risk of harm. It includes the type and extent of the harm as well as the likelihood or predictability of its occurrence.
A greater duty of care is required for hazardous situations that are more inclined to result in fatalities or severe injuries than for those that simply pose a slight risk. The landowner needs to exercise more caution when there is a significant probability of harm occurring.
Courts also take into account the obligations of a landowner under the “duty of care”. Higher standards are warranted in circumstances where a threat is likely to cause catastrophic damage. This is not the case when the likelihood of harm is minimal.
Generally speaking, a landowner’s duty of care entails:
Depending on the circumstances of each case, courts routinely modify the obligation of care. For instance, the law may require a landowner to conduct more frequent inspections and to be more watchful for repairs and warnings when they are aware that guests will be on their property. Many injured visitors wonder, “Is a slip or trip an accident or a crime? The law treats these incidents very carefully.
Take a retail storekeeper, for example. Every day, they hope to attract consumers to their store. Daily (or more regular) inspections may be required for certain clients, who are referred to as “invitees” or “company invitees” by the law. In contrast, consider a homeowner who throws a Fourth of July party for friends and family. The owner most likely only needs to check the premises a few days prior to the event so as to keep party goers (or, in legal jargon, “licensees”) safe.
Individuals who enter or stay on a property without authorization are subject to the duty to handle themselves with reasonable care under California slip and fall law. Generally speaking, however, trespassers are likely to be subject to a less stringent obligation than those who access a property with authorization.
How come? The fact that trespassers are trespassing does not justify a reduced obligation of care. The reason for this is that people who enter the property with permission are likely to visit it more frequently than trespassers. Remember that the possibility of injury plays a role in determining duty. A landowner has no need to worry about trespassers becoming injured when trespassing is rare.
The duty of care is increased when a landowner understands (or should understand) that trespassers frequently enter their property. There is a considerable risk of injury to trespassers. The land may need to be fenced. “No Trespassing” signs posted. Other corrective actions need to be taken.
This is particularly true when it comes to trespassing kids. They are frequently drawn to an area by features like swimming pools, a bounce house, or abandoned cars. People ask, “Is a slip or trip an accident or a crime?” The real issue is whether reasonable care was ignored.
If two conditions are not met, there is no duty of care. The land must be in a hazardous condition. The owner of the property must have known about the risk. They can provide a warning or take corrective action, only then.
Hazardous conditions: Examples
The following are some instances of hazardous property conditions that commonly pose an excessive risk of injury:
The landowner had to be aware of the risk. It is unreasonable to expect them to alert others about or correct them when they are unaware of hazardous situations. A slip and fall case requires proof that the landowner was aware of the condition. The landowner possesses no obligation of care without it. Expect the owner of the property to often deny knowing about the threat. “Is a slip or trip an accident or a crime?” It requires looking at property conditions and owner behavior.
It is sufficient for a landowner to be aware of a hazardous condition. It can be difficult to demonstrate what a landowner truly knew. Here are some examples of the sort of evidence you could search for.
A duty of care may occasionally be established by a landowner’s advance knowledge of the risk. A landowner may deny knowing about a dangerous condition. This is frequently the case. You will have to rely on their constructive knowledge.
Demonstrating the duration of the hazardous situation prior to your injury is crucial for constructive notice. You could then contend that if the landowner had exercised reasonable caution. They would have examined the property, found the hazard, & either remedied it or alerted you to it.
Landowners have several defenses against a slip and fall lawsuit. Among the most prevalent are:
You were at fault
The owner’s legal liability for your damage may be defended by your own carelessness. Any carelessness on your part, no matter how small a part of the total, completely negates your claim if the accident occurred in a responsible state. Your portion of the negligence lowers the damages you can obtain when the event occurred in a comparative fault state.
One state with comparative negligence is California. Your injuries are reduced by the amount of your proportionate share of the overall negligence. This is applicable when you are determined to be partially at fault for the fall. You are still entitled to a portion of your overall damages until it is shown that you are solely at fault.
The defendant will do all in their power to place the responsibility for the fall on you. These are some of the most typical assertions.
The store makes every effort to draw your attention to the racks, end edges, and other places where stuff is on display while you’re shopping. This tactic not only boosts sales but also helps in the event that an unsafe situation in the aisle causes you to tumble. And here’s why.
You should anticipate being asked where you had been looking right before you fell by the defendant’s attorney or insurance adjuster. You agreed that you were perusing the products on the racks as the store desired. You won’t succeed if you say that you were looking at the ground. The store will accuse you of being irresponsible for not seeing the dangerous scenario in time to stop it.
You run the risk of being deemed at least partially responsible for the fall. Discuss with your attorney how to respond to inquiries such as these. You want to minimize your portion of the blame.
For accidents brought on by “open and evident” hazards, landowners are either exempt from liability or have their culpability reduced in many states, including California. A situation that is readily apparent and that someone with common sense taking reasonable precautions for their own protection should be able to see is considered an open and obvious risk. Snow or ice accumulations, big objects, and darkness are common instances.
Courts generally assume that obvious hazards don’t pose a major injury risk. It’s on the person who spots the danger to watch their step & stay safe.
You’re Taking the Chance
Injuries stemming from a recognized danger are typically not the landowner’s obligation when you willingly and consciously assume that risk. Recreational pursuits like skydiving, base jumping, bungee jumping, & other high-risk experiences.
A provision known as a “statute of limitations” restricts the amount of time you have to launch a case. You have 2 years from the date of injury to file a lawsuit for the majority of slip and fall cases in California. If you are injured on government land, if you were technically incapacitated at the time of the fall, or if the defendant leaves California to avoid being sued, different regulations may be applicable.
Speak with a California personal injury attorney as soon as possible if you’re not sure how long you must submit a slip and fall claim. A slip and fall claim is thrown out if you fail the filing date and don’t receive an extension that offers you more time to file a lawsuit. Your entitlement to compensation for your injuries has been revoked.
The law is very clear. Anyone who controls a property has to keep it safe. The intent must be to protect visitors or alert them to the danger. The owner has to conduct frequent inspections of the property.
The injured party must demonstrate that the tenant/property owner did not take appropriate precautions. They knew it was unsafe and could lead to a visitor tripping and falling and getting hurt. The organization can be held accountable if that occurs. There could be monetary damages brought on by the victim’s injuries. Tree roots, crumbling sidewalks, & crates or pallets in paths are a few examples of potential dangers.
Evidence of carelessness must demonstrate that:
Are there challenging legal problems at play? Here, we’re talking about legal matters that could really harm or ruin your case. One good example is the statute of limitations. Comparative or contributory carelessness, as previously said, is also applicable. Your best option will be to have legal counsel on your side since comparative negligence is very certain to be involved in a slip and fall lawsuit.
The insurance provider and its lawyers will represent the defendant. The battle won’t be fair if you don’t have the legal experts.
Slip, trip, and fall cases may look simple. They usually aren’t. What happened in a few seconds can turn into months or years of medical treatment. Missed work and stress happen. California law does give injured people strong protections. Those protections only work if the facts are clearly shown. Property owners are not insurers of safety. They are not free to ignore risks either. The balance matters.
Many cases hinge on details. How long has the hazard existed? Who knew about it? Whether warnings were posted. What inspections were done, or not done. Even small facts can shift responsibility under California’s comparative negligence rules.
Insurance companies rarely make things easy. They look for ways to reduce blame or push it back on the injured person. That’s why understanding your rights early matters. Evidence fades. Deadlines don’t move. Getting legal guidance at the earliest can protect your ability to recover what you’ve lost.
1. Slip & Fall Lawsuit: Who and where to file?
Your attorney will file the lawsuit in the California superior court. It is most likely closest to the defendant’s residence, place of work, or the location where you were hurt in a fall.
2. Will There Be a Trial?
Most personal injury claims end in settlement. There can be a trial when the defendant is certain that you were primarily at fault. Talk to your attorney about settlement & negotiation tactics.
3. Case resolution: What are the timelines?
Depends on the case. Your case may be resolved in a few weeks to a few months if the facts are undisputed, it is evident that the landowner was at fault, you have gathered evidence to back up your argument, and your damages and injuries are adequately documented. You should anticipate that the trial process will take at least a year. It will take even longer if there is an appeal. A case may be settled at any point during the trial’s preparation/execution.
4. Recoverable Damages: What are those?
You will receive what the law refers to as “compensatory damages” if you prevail in your case. They are intended to make up for:
Pain and distress, emotional anguish, and incapacity are examples of non-out-of-pocket expenses, whereas out-of-pocket losses include medical bills, missed income, and the cost of replacement services for the home.
Have a quick question? We answered nearly 2000 FAQs.
See all blogs: Business | Corporate | Employment Law
Most recent blogs:
Contact our attorney.
By: Brad Nakase, Attorney
