Defending Clients Against Premises Liability Claims
Property owners have a legal duty to exercise reasonable care to keep their premises safe and free from dangerous and defective conditions. This duty extends beyond property owners to other parties connected to the property, including landlords, tenants and property managers. When these parties are aware of a dangerous condition and fail to provide adequate warnings or take appropriate steps to remedy the condition, they can be held liable for injuries suffered by individuals who are lawfully on the property.
The attorneys in KDV’s General Liability Practice defend clients in a broad spectrum of premises liability claims. Our lawyers represent property owners, landlords, tenants, management companies and other parties facing claims for accidents and injuries occurring on all types of properties, from apartment and condominium complexes, to shopping malls and retail establishments, to municipal buildings and government properties. We are nationally recognized as a team of experienced and diligent attorneys focused on minimizing our clients’ potential liability.
Handling a Wide Range of Premises Liability Accident Cases
KDV lawyers handle a full range of premises liability cases, including:
- Slip and falls
- Inadequate security
- Improper maintenance
- Fire and explosions
- Exposure to hazardous materials and products
- Other dangerous or defective conditions
When a premises liability claim surfaces, our lawyers take swift action to protect clients from exposure. We carefully investigate the claim and provide clients with a clear assessment of the potential liability and damages associated with the case.
In premises liability claims, disputes often arise over which parties are responsible for handling the claim and providing payments to the injured parties. Our lawyers have a deep understanding of these types of disputes and thoroughly analyze lease agreements and other contractual documents to identify the responsible parties. KDV’s legal team also handles cases involving municipal liability and is well-versed in the complex municipal codes that set forth specific standards and govern responsibility when accidents occur.
While we attempt to resolve premises liability claims early on through negotiations, our lawyers are fully prepared to defend our clients in court. We are well-trained litigators who know how to successfully litigate premises liability cases in state and federal courts at both the trial and appellate levels.
Premises liability matters handled by the members of KDV’s General Liability Practice include:
- Kennedy v. Cross Sound Ferry Service, Inc., Supreme Court, Suffolk County – Represented one of the largest privately-owned ferry companies in the United States. The plaintiff claimed that she slipped and fell on a ferry boat owned and operated by Cross Sound Ferry. The plaintiff claimed that the insured was negligent in ownership and operation of the ferry boat. The case settled for defense costs after jury selection.
- Walker v. Con Edison, et al., Supreme Court, Kings County – Represented a bank in a premises liability case in which the plaintiff slipped and fell on a sidewalk. The plaintiff sued the building owner (landlord), bank (lessee) and Con Ed. The case involved both general negligence (slip/fall) issues and commercial (lease interpretation) issues between the defendants. The case settled after jury selection for a significant amount in total, but only a nuisance value contribution from our client-bank.
- Reyderman v. Meyer Berfond Trust, et al., Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Second JudicialDepartment– Represented a bank (tenant) in a third-party action commenced by a building-owner (landlord) seeking contractual indemnity based on a lease agreement, following a slip and fall on an adjacent sidewalk. The landlord moved for summary judgment against the bank on the issue of contractual indemnity. We opposed, citing the absence of a contractual duty and arguing that the locus in quo was not within the “demises premise.” After oral argument, the Appellate Division affirmed the trial court’s decision.