|

Slip and fall accidents are the leading cause of both employee and customer injuries at supermarkets, according to the National Floor Safety Institute (NFSI). Nearly 60 percent of all grocery store general liability claims stem from slips and falls, the NFSI reports.

Grocery stores have a duty to exercise reasonable care in maintaining a safe shopping environment. Posting wet floor signs where appropriate is one way a store owner and employees can reduce the likelihood of a slip and fall accident. Failure to do so could be evidence that reasonable care wasn’t taken. Ultimately, the victim must show that the store knew or should have known about the slippery condition that caused the accident but failed to take appropriate action.

Actual Knowledge Vs. Constructive Knowledge

A grocery store owner might be liable for a fall caused by a wet floor if:

  • The owner or an employee caused the wet floor.
  • The owner or an employee knew about the wet floor but did not take steps to correct it (actual knowledge).
  • The owner or an employee reasonably should have known about the wet floor (constructive knowledge) and taken steps to mitigate the danger posed by the wet floor.

If a supermarket owner or employee caused the wet floor—for example, by mopping or spilling liquid—this would show that the store had knowledge of the wet floor. If the store creates the wet-floor hazard, it should take measures to prevent a fall by posting signs.

Showing actual knowledge of a wet floor created by someone else isn’t so straightforward. The most likely way to demonstrate actual knowledge is to show that someone reported the wet floor to an on-duty worker. If the incident was reported but nothing was done to correct the wet floor, this is strong evidence of negligence by the supermarket.

Less straightforward still is showing that a store had constructive knowledge of a wet floor. The standard to be applied here is what is considered “reasonable.” It may not be reasonable, for example, to expect an employee to notice a spill immediately after it occurs. The more time that goes by, however, the more reasonable it is to expect supermarket staff to notice the spill.

To summarize, if a store owner or employee created the wet floor by doing something like mopping and failed to post a “wet floor” sign, you likely have a strong case against the store for negligence. If you can show that staff either knew about (actual knowledge) or should have known about (constructive knowledge) the wet floor and failed to take corrective measures, this is also evidence of negligence.

Protect Your Interests. Speak With A Lawyer.

Supermarkets deal with a high volume of slip and fall claims, and their insurers are experienced at defending them. Without legal representation of your own, you run the risk of having your claim devalued or worse, dismissed entirely.

By talking with a lawyer, you’ll get a stronger sense of the strengths and weaknesses of your case and how to best proceed. Schedule a free consultation with the lawyers at David Resnick & Associates, P.C., in New York City. Call us now or send us a secure online message. Our attorneys have a strong record of success helping slip and fall victims.

Sources: