Premises Liability of Stores Does Not Mean All Injury Victims Have A Case Explains Inland Empire Personal Injury Attorney

Many people incorrectly believe that if they are injured on the premises of a store of other business, that the business is automatically liable to pay for their injury. This is not true in California. In California, the injured person must prove that the shop owner business failed to act in a reasonable prudent manner and that the failure created the circumstances that caused their injury. But it's important to note that the failure to act reasonably is often obvious from the circumstances. Plus, video cameras can help prove a failure to keep the store free of hazards. Have you experienced an injury at a shop, store or other business open to the public? Maybe a hardware store, grocery store or events center? If so, you should consult with a premises liability personal injury attorney. Napolin Accident Injury Lawyer in Ontario California is a prime pick. We are a group of local Inland Empire injury lawyers with extensive personal injury litigation experience. See this post by Napolin Accident Injury Lawyer on Google: https://posts.gle/MMnMe

Check out Napolin's article on Abatement of Security in Premises Liability Violence Cases: https://www.napolinlaw.com/tag/premises-liability/

Slip and Fall Injury Lawyer Inland Empire: Ontario, Upland, Rancho Cucamonga, Chino, Fontana, Rialto, Colton, Montclair, Pomona

Always consult with a personal injury attorney if you need some understanding of how a shop owner might be held liable for your injury on their premises. Here is an example of one of the jury instructions for "Unsafe Condition": 

CACI No. 1003. Unsafe Conditions

Judicial Council of California Civil Jury Instructions (2017 edition)

[Name of defendant] was negligent in the use or maintenance of the property if:

1.A condition on the property created an unreasonable risk of harm;

2. [Name of defendant] knew or, through the exercise of reasonable care, should have known about it; and 

3. [Name of defendant] failed to repair the condition, protect against harm from the condition, or give adequate warning of the condition.