Sabatini and Associates, LLC

A “slip and fall” or “trip and fall” is the generic term for an injury which occurs when someone slips, trips or falls as a result of a dangerous or hazardous condition on someone else’s property. It includes falls as a result of water, ice or snow, as well as abrupt changes in flooring, poor lighting, or a hidden hazard, such as a gap or hard to see hole in the ground. The National Center for Injury Prevention and Control estimates that in 2004, more than 8 million people were injured in falls.

If you are on someone else’s property and injure yourself as a result of a dangerous condition on the property, the landowner or business proprietor may be liable for your injuries.

 
Slip and fall lawsuits can be complex when the injury took place on municipal property.  This lates case is an example of the hurdles the injured plaintiff faces when injured in a slip and fall on town or city property. In the case of Durant v. Hartford Board of Education, plaintiff slipped on a water in a stairwell while picking up her son from an after school day care program at a Hartford public school.  She was injured and filed a personal injury suit against the Board of Education.  The Superior Court held that plaintiff’s action was barred by  General Statutes § 52-557n, which gave the Board a qualified municipal immunity for discretionary acts.  The Appellate Court reversed, holding that the plaintiff fell within the “identifiable person-imminent harm” exception in General Statutes § 52-557n (a) (2) (B) because the puddle in the stairwell was limited in both its duration and location and because the potential for harm resulting from a fall in a stairwell was significant and foreseeable.  Durrant v. Board of Education, 96 Conn. App. 456 (2006) (Schaller, J. dissenting).  The case is now before the Connecticut Supreme Court.

The Connecticut State Supreme Court recently adopted the mode of operation of rule. This rule is extremely important for people injured as a result of a fall down (slip and fall) at a self service store. Self service stores are supermarkets, cafeterias, fast-food restaurants and other businesses where the customer selects the merchandise or food from the displays as opposed to an employee getting the product or food for the customer.

The mode of operation rule allows a customer injured due to a condition inherent in the way a store is operated to recover compensation without establishing that the store had actual or constructive knowledge of the danegrous condition. For example, if a restaurant has a self-service salad bar one would expect that customers will be dropping food on the floor. If this is occuring and the restaurant does not take reasonable measures to prevent this from happening then the restaurant is liable for injuries suffered by a customer that falls due to food on the floor.

The rule does away with requiring the injured person from proving that the restaurant had specific notice of the very item that caused the person to fall. This rule will allow many more injured customers to rightfully recover compensation in slip and fall incidents.

The name of the case that adopted the mode of operation rule is Kelly v. Stop and Shop, Imc. and the decision will be officially released on April 3, 2007.