Tag: slip and fall

Were you injured or a crime victim on someone else’s property?

Posted by Jeff on
an example of an invitee

If you slip and fall or a rape victim on someone else’s property, the reason why you are on the property matters. Whether you can recover for your injuries often turns on your relationship with the property owner. The law has fancy words to describe the different types of relationships, which we cover below.

The first type of relationship, that of a trespasser, is easy to understand. A trespasser is someone who goes onto someone else’s property without invitation or permission. An example is if someone breaks into your house. If the trespasser gets hurt, you are responsible only if you intentionally tried to hurt the trespasser. This becomes relevant in a landlord-tenant situation. If a lease does not identify a tenant, arguably the tenant is a trespasser and will have a tough claim against the landlord. However, this can be overcome if the landlord knew the tenant was living on the property but took no action.

The next step up is a licensee. This is a person invited onto the property as a social guest but who does not provide a benefit to the owner. A licensee is on the property only for his own convenience. O.C.G.A. § 51-3-2. So, if you invite a friend to your house, your friend is an invitee. If a licensee is injured, the property owner must exercise reasonable care to prevent injury.

Finally, there is what is known as an invitee. An invitee is a person who is invited and provides benefit to the owner. An example is if you go to Publix to buy groceries. You have been invited by the Publix onto the property and are benefiting Publix by buying groceries. With regard to an invitee, a property owner must exercise ordinary care to keep the property safe. This is a higher standard than a licensee. And requires the owner to inspect its property to make sure it is safe for its customers.

If you are injured or are a crime victim on someone else’s property, please call us. Our number is (404) 382-9991.

Slip and Fall in a Parking Lot

Posted by Jeff on

Who is responsible when you’re injured in a shopping center parking lot. Is it the store you were shopping in? Is it the owner of the shopping center? Or, is it both? These were the issues decided in a recent Georgia appellate case. See Boyd v. Big Lots Stores, Inc., 18A1140 (July 31, 2018).

In what is likely one of his last opinions, Judge Andrews, writing for the court, predictably sides against the injury party. Judge Andrews is retiring from the bench, and for attorneys who represent injured parties, it can’t come soon enough. While Judge Andrews authors intelligent, articulate opinions, he typically sides with businesses and insurance companies.

With regard to parking lot injuries, the general rule is that a business must keep its premises and approaches safe for its customers. This includes protecting its customers from known dangerous conditions in the parking lot. In the Big Lots case, the customer was injured 45-feet away way from the store entrance. The Court of Appeals explained that an “approach” to a premises refers to property that is within the last few steps taken by the customer, as opposed to mere pedestrians. More specifically, an approach “is that property directly contiguous, adjacent to, and touching those entryways to [the] premises under the control of an owner or occupier of land, through which the owner or occupier, by express or implied invitation, has induced or led others to come upon his premises for any lawful purpose, and through which such owner or occupier could foresee a reasonable invitee would find it necessary or convenient to traverse while entering or exiting in the course of the business for which the invitation was extended.”

In Big Lots, the customer exited the store, walked across a sidewalk, and continued away from the store into the parking lot. The Court decided she was no longer within the store’s “approach” when she slipped and fell because the area was not adjacent to or touching the entry/exit of the store.

Although Big Lots got out of the case, all was not lost for the injured party as she still has a claim against the owner of the shopping center for her injuries.