Every day we walk, work, play and gather on property that we have a right to expect to be safe for our use. Unfortunately, those with the responsibility to provide a safe environment for our expected use don’t always meet their responsibilities, and serious injuries can occur.
People suffer significant injuries from the unexpected presence of ice or snow, the lack of security, or the presence of defects. These conditions leave property unsafe for our use, and can cause significant personal injury and economic loss.
As with other cases involving issues of liability and damages, LaskeLaw llc is prepared to employ experts in the fields of engineering, meteorology, economics, vocational rehabilitation and, of course, medicine, in order to fully prepare a premises liability case for trial.
We know that a premises defect case can be one of the most difficult cases to prove, and as a result many of these cases simply have to be tried in order to obtain any fair result for our clients. It is our experience that settlement of these claims, if possible at all, is usually only achieved after fully preparing the matter for trial.
Examples of the types of premises liability cases we have handled include:
- A truck driver attempted to unload a truckload of kennel fencing that had been loaded by the manufacturer of the product in a tractor-trailer. Unknown to the driver, the sections of fencing were tied into place with wires and were tightened into place, leaving them essentially “under pressure”. When the wires securing the sections of fence were removed, the sections of fence sprang forward like a mousetrap, pinning the truck driver against the inside wall of the trailer with 3,800 pounds of fencing. He suffered the loss of his leg above the knee, serious internal injuries, and lost the ability to engage in his profession as a truck driver. The case against the manufacturer of the kennel fencing settled prior to trial for a very significant value.
- A woman was walking her dog in front of her house on a winter morning in February when she fell on hard, frozen, rutted snow and ice that had not been removed by the town. Evidence presented to the jury at trial indicated that the town failed to plow this particular section of the road despite the specific complaints of the plaintiff, and as a result this defective condition persisted. The plaintiff broke her hip in this fall, was required to undergo surgery and a very painful rehabilitation, and was awarded $300,000.00 against the town by a jury.