Los Angeles, CA personal injury attorney Narbeh Shirvanian discusses whether or not all defects give rise to premises liability. In premises liability cases, one of the significant challenges faced by claimants or prospective plaintiffs revolves around the issue of liability. The defense commonly directs its focus on disputing liability during trial, with a prevalent concern emerging during consultations when individuals describe incidents involving seemingly minor defects like small cracks in a restaurant floor or slightly lifted tiles.

California incorporates the trivial defect doctrine, firmly established in case law, providing defendants with a means to argue against liability based on the perceived insignificance of the defect. This doctrine enables defendants to claim that the defect was so minute that, even with reasonable care and property inspections, its discovery would have been unlikely.

Success in a premises liability case hinges on the demonstration that the landowner or controller had notice of the potentially dangerous condition. While actual notice implies direct knowledge of the problem, establishing constructive notice becomes crucial. Constructive notice is based on the argument that the property owner, by neglecting reasonable periodic inspections, overlooked the hazardous condition.

The law acknowledges the concept of a trivial defect, citing factors such as a quarter-inch difference between elevations as a potential defense for the property owner. Despite the presented challenge, the pursuit of a viable premises liability case necessitates the early involvement of experts. Engineers, for instance, play a crucial role in measuring and documenting conditions, conducting coefficient of friction tests, and evaluating the severity of the dangerous condition.

Taking an assertive approach from the outset, especially in documenting the cause of the fall and the extent of the hazardous condition, proves pivotal in determining the success or failure of premises liability cases.