If you have been injured on another person’s property, the owner or manager of the property is liable to compensate you for injuries and other damages if they have been negligent in some manner. In St. Mary’s County, Maryland, property owners are responsible for keeping their property safe and free from hazards. These include hazards located in both interior and exterior spaces. Types of premises liability cases include:

• Trip and fall accidents — such as tripping over items on the floor or on uneven broken flooring
• Slip and fall accidents — such as slipping on liquids or slippery floors
• Toppling merchandise or fixtures
• Falling debris and other materials from above
• Electrical, fire, and other types of burn hazards
• Falling into pools and other water hazards
• Elevator and escalator malfunctions

Persons injured by the negligent behavior of property owners in St. Mary’s County, MD., are legally entitled to make insurance claims for compensation and to file personal injury lawsuits if an insurance settlement cannot be reached. Contact us here at the Law Office of Robert Castro for a consultation by calling us at (301) 870-1200 or by using our contact page. We have offices in Waldorf, Maryland.

To prove that an injured person is entitled to compensation, the victim must prove several legal elements. First, it must be shown that there was a hazard or dangerous condition on the property. As noted, this might be an uneven or slippery floor, some trip hazard, or some other unsafe condition.

Second, it must be shown that the property owner knew about the condition or SHOULD have known about the condition. Most Maryland premises liability cases involve the latter idea — that is, the property owner should have known about the condition. This is generally called “constructive knowledge.” Constructive knowledge exists where the property owner would have discovered or known about the hazard if the property owner were reasonably observant and attentive. So, for example, if a store owner was reasonably attentive, the store owner would have discovered a large puddle of water soon after the puddle appeared.

Third, it must be shown that it was reasonably foreseeable that the condition might cause injury. Fourth, it must be shown that the property owner failed to take reasonable steps to correct or warn against the hazardous and unsafe condition. In other words, it must be shown that the property owner did not fix the condition or did not warn against the condition (by putting out “yellow warning cones” or blocking off the area, for example).

When defending, property owners will often attempt to argue or show evidence that one of the above-described elements cannot be proven. So, property owners might argue that the condition was not hazardous or that they put out sufficient warnings. Another defense is often called “assumption of the risk,” which is when it is proven that the victim was aware of the hazard but chose to continue into the area containing the unsafe conditions.

Contact Waldorf, MD Personal Injury Attorney Robert Castro Today

This article has been provided by the Law Office of Robert Castro. For more information or questions, contact our office to speak to an experienced Maryland personal injury lawyer at (301) 870-1200. We are Waldorf, MD, Personal Injury lawyers. Our address is 2670 Crain Highway, Waldorf, MD 20601.