Written and reviewed by Josh Kohanim, Esq., California Bar No. 328609 · Reviewed
Quick questions
Premises liability claims defined
We represent people hurt on property someone else owns or runs anywhere in Los Angeles County. The claim turns on how the duty is set, who can be sued, how fault is divided, what a case is worth, and the deadlines. Workers hurt on their own job site go through workers' compensation first, and collisions between moving vehicles in a parking lot are vehicle claims.
Premises liability is the responsibility of a person who owns, occupies, or controls land for injuries caused by its condition. It is not a separate body of law. Civil Code section 1714(a) states the rule: everyone is responsible for injury caused to another by their want of ordinary care in the management of their property. Ordinary care is what a reasonably careful person would use in the same situation. An occupier is whoever possesses the land, deed or no deed.
Elements of a premises case
- The defendant owned, leased, occupied, or controlled the property.
- The defendant was negligent in the use or maintenance of it.
- You were harmed.
- The defendant's negligence was a substantial factor in causing your harm.
Those four elements come from CACI No. 1000, the instruction a Los Angeles jury receives. The notes under it, called Sources and Authority, quote Kesner v. Superior Court (2016) 1 Cal.5th 1132 for the point that the elements of a negligence claim and a premises liability claim are the same. You are proving ordinary negligence, and the property is where it happened.
Your reason for being there
California abandoned the old status categories in 1968. In Rowland v. Christian (1968) 69 Cal.2d 108, the California Supreme Court held that the reason a person was on the land is one fact among many, not the thing that sets the duty.
We decline to follow and perpetuate such rigid classifications. The proper test to be applied to the liability of the possessor of land in accordance with section 1714 of the Civil Code is whether in the management of his property he has acted as a reasonable man in view of the probability of injury to others.Rowland v. Christian (1968) 69 Cal.2d 108
| Why you were there | The old rule | What California applies now | What that changes |
|---|---|---|---|
| Invitee, a store customer | Full care, including inspection | Ordinary care, Civil Code 1714 | Little. This was already the high standard. |
| Licensee, a dinner guest | Warn of known traps, no duty to inspect | Ordinary care, Civil Code 1714 | A guest is owed what a customer is owed. |
| Trespasser | No duty except not to injure willfully | Ordinary care, entry is one fact | Weakens a claim without ending it. |
What replaced the categories is a set of factors courts weigh to decide whether a duty exists at all. CACI No. 1000 names them as the Rowland factors: how foreseeable the harm was, the closeness of the connection between the conduct and the injury, the moral blame attached to that conduct, the policy of preventing future harm, the burden of imposing a duty, and the availability and cost of insurance. Foreseeability means whether a reasonable person in the owner's position would have anticipated this kind of harm.
Liability for a premises injury
More people than the deed shows. CACI No. 1000's Sources and Authority quote Alcaraz v. Vece (1997) 14 Cal.4th 1149 for the rule that own, possess, or control is stated in the alternative: control alone is enough. That word decides who ends up in a Los Angeles premises case, because here the owner of a strip mall, the business inside it, the management company, and the janitorial contractor are usually four entities with four insurers.
Coverage is written case by case, so the last column below, the policy that usually responds, is the pattern we see most often in our premises files, not a rule of law. Sorting out which policies respond is the first real work in the case.
| Party | What they control | Duty that attaches | Policy that usually responds |
|---|---|---|---|
| Owner | The land and the structure | Reasonable care to keep it safe | Commercial or homeowner liability |
| Landlord | Common areas, structure, repairs | Landlord duty under CACI 1006 | Landlord liability |
| Tenant business | The space it leases and operates | Reasonable care to its patrons | The tenant's own general liability |
| Property manager | Inspection, maintenance, complaints | Care over what it manages | The management company's policy |
| Contractor | The task it agreed to perform | Care in performing that task | The contractor's general liability |
Naming every party who controlled the space matters for a second reason. Under Proposition 51, codified at Civil Code section 1431.2(a), each defendant's liability for noneconomic damages is several only and not joint. If a responsible party is left out, its share of the noneconomic award cannot be collected from anyone else.
The premises cases we take
Premises liability is the broader category, and a slip and fall is the most common case within it. These are the conditions that bring people to us.
- Slip, trip, and fall. Spills, buckled sidewalks, unmarked level changes, and torn carpet, where the dispute is about notice, covered in full on our Los Angeles slip and fall lawyer page.
- Negligent security. An assault, a robbery, or a shooting at an apartment complex, a parking structure, or a bar, where broken gates, dead cameras, or absent guards let it happen.
- Swimming pools and drowning. Missing enclosures, unlatched gates, no supervision, and drain entrapment at apartment, hotel, and public pools.
- Falling objects and merchandise. Stock stacked above head height in a warehouse store, unsecured displays, and loads nobody strapped.
- Stairways, handrails, and code violations. Risers of uneven height, a handrail pulled out of the wall, and a stairwell with one working bulb.
- Amusement park and ride injuries. Roller coasters, water slides, fair rides, and lifts, where a ride operator may owe a carrier's heightened duty and the ticket's fine print is part of the case.
- Elevators and escalators. Misleveling, sudden stops, and comb plate injuries (where the steps meet the landing), where the maintenance contract usually decides who is responsible.
- Fires, electrical, and burns. Missing smoke alarms, blocked exits, exposed wiring, and scalding water. Severe burns run alongside our catastrophic injury practice.
- Dog bites and animal attacks. The owner is strictly liable under Civil Code section 3342, and a landlord who knew about the animal can be liable too. See our Los Angeles dog bite lawyer page.
- Construction hazards that hurt people who do not work there. Open trenches, scaffolding over a public sidewalk, and falling debris. Injured workers start on our construction accident page.
Head and spine injuries come out of these cases more often than people expect, because the fall is uncontrolled and there is nothing to brace against. Our pages on brain injury, spinal cord injury, and wrongful death cover proof and damages in more depth.
Attacks on the property
Negligent security is a premises claim brought when an owner's failure to take reasonable protective measures made a criminal attack possible. CACI No. 1005 states the standard: an owner of a business open to the public, and a landlord, must use reasonable care to protect patrons, guests, or tenants from criminal conduct the owner can reasonably anticipate.
Whether that duty exists is decided by the judge, and it is decided by weighing two things against each other. In Castaneda v. Olsher (2007) 41 Cal.4th 1205, the California Supreme Court put it plainly: where the burden of preventing future harm is great, a high degree of foreseeability may be required, and where the harm can be prevented by simple means, a lesser degree may be required. Fixing a gate latch is simple. Posting armed guards is not, and the court demands far more proof before requiring it.
That proof usually takes the form of prior similar incidents, meaning crimes of the same general kind at or near the property before yours. Castaneda holds that a heavily burdensome duty such as hiring guards requires prior similar incidents on the premises or other sufficiently serious indications of a reasonably foreseeable risk of violent criminal assaults, citing Ann M. v. Pacific Plaza Shopping Center (1993) 6 Cal.4th 666, which counts crimes at an immediately proximate, substantially similar business.
That evidence exists, and most of it disappears unless it is requested quickly. It includes police calls for service to the address, incident reports the management company filed, tenant complaint logs, guard post orders (the written instructions to guards), camera retention schedules, and work orders for the gate that never latched. Our guide to negligent security claims in Los Angeles covers how each one is obtained and what it proves.
Injuries on public property
A public entity is not liable under ordinary negligence. It is liable under Government Code section 835, which requires proof that the property was in a dangerous condition at the time of the injury, that the injury was proximately caused by it, that the condition created a reasonably foreseeable risk of that kind of injury, and either that an employee created it or that the entity had notice in time to protect against it. Section 830(a) defines a dangerous condition of public property as one creating a substantial risk of injury when the property is used with due care in a reasonably foreseeable manner.
| Step | Private property | Public entity |
|---|---|---|
| First filing | None | Written government claim |
| Deadline for it | Not applicable | 6 months, Gov. Code 911.2 |
| Sue before that | Yes | No, Gov. Code 945.4 |
| Time to sue | 2 years, CCP 335.1 | 6 months after written rejection, Gov. Code 945.6 |
| If no rejection letter | Not applicable | 2 years from accrual, Gov. Code 945.6 |
A government claim is a short written form presented to the entity itself, not a lawsuit. Government Code section 945.4 bars any suit for money or damages until that claim has been presented and acted on or deemed rejected. The offices are separate: the County of Los Angeles takes claims through the Executive Officer of the Board of Supervisors, while LA Metro accepts its form only in person or by mail and rejects claims sent by email. Our guide to suing a city, county, or Metro has the full sequence.
Premises liability case value
Value is the sum of two categories. Economic damages are the losses with a receipt: medical bills incurred, the cost of care you still need, wages lost, and earning capacity you will not get back. Noneconomic damages are the losses without one: pain, disfigurement, anxiety, and the things you can no longer do. There is no formula and no average that means anything for your file.
One rule reshapes the medical number. In Howell v. Hamilton Meats & Provisions, Inc. (2011) 52 Cal.4th 541, the California Supreme Court held that a plaintiff whose medical expenses are paid through private insurance may recover no more than the amounts paid by the plaintiff or the insurer, or still owing at trial. The number on the hospital bill is not the number a jury hears.
One of our own cases shows the pattern. In a slip and fall that required a hip replacement, the store denied liability and made no offer. Security footage showed staff already knew about the spill, and the case resolved for $1,000,000. That is one case with its own facts and its own coverage. Our guide to what a premises liability case is worth covers liens, policy limits, and the arithmetic that turns a gross recovery into what you keep.
Partial fault
California uses pure comparative fault: a jury assigns a percentage of blame to everyone involved, including you, and reduces your award by your share. There is no cutoff. Someone found 70 percent responsible for their own fall still recovers 30 percent. Expect the defense to argue you were on your phone, in the wrong shoes, or moving too fast, because every point of that percentage reduces what the insurer pays.
Then Proposition 51 splits what is left. Take a $600,000 verdict, $200,000 economic and $400,000 noneconomic, against a building owner found 60 percent at fault and a maintenance contractor found 40 percent. Either defendant can be made to pay the entire $200,000. For the $400,000, Civil Code section 1431.2(a) makes each liable for its own share and no more: $240,000 from the owner, $160,000 from the contractor. Several liability is that rule. If the contractor is uninsured and has no assets, its $160,000 cannot be collected.
| Damage type | Joint or several | What it means for you |
|---|---|---|
| Economic, such as bills and lost wages | Joint and several | Any one defendant can be made to pay all of it |
| Noneconomic, such as pain and loss of function | Several only, Civil Code 1431.2(a) | Each defendant pays only its own percentage |
Owners who are not liable
Many injuries happen on property that nobody is liable for, and it is better to know that early.
- No notice, and no failure to inspect. If the spill was thirty seconds old and the store inspects on a schedule it can document, there was no time to find it. Notice defeats more premises claims than any other element.
- A condition too small to be dangerous, on public property. Government Code section 830(a) requires a substantial risk of injury to a person using the property with due care. A minor surface irregularity often does not clear that bar.
- Land open for recreation. Civil Code section 846 says an owner owes no duty to keep the premises safe for entry or use by others for a recreational purpose. Three exceptions: a willful or malicious failure to guard or warn, entry granted for consideration, meaning for a fee, and a person expressly invited rather than merely permitted.
- A hazard that was warned about. CACI No. 1003 lets an owner meet the duty by repairing the condition, protecting against it, or adequately warning of it. A cone on a wet floor is a defense, and it weakens if you had no practical way around the area.
- Injuries covered by workers' compensation. If you were hurt doing your own job, Labor Code section 3602(a) makes workers' compensation the exclusive remedy against your employer. A claim against a property owner who is not your employer can still exist.
- Hazardous recreation on public land. Government Code section 831.7 immunizes a public entity against people injured taking part in a hazardous recreational activity on its property, with exceptions including a failure to warn of a known dangerous condition.
Steps after an injury
Say nothing about fault, and give the property's insurer no recorded statement while you still do not know how badly you are hurt. That call is a search for the sentence that reduces your percentage. How to handle insurance companies goes through the questions they ask and why.
After you call
- 1We get you treated
Treatment comes before valuation. We help arrange care that does not require payment up front, and the medical record becomes the foundation of the claim.
- 2We preserve the evidence
Preservation letters go out for footage, incident reports, inspection logs, and calls for service. We identify every entity that controlled the space and its insurer.
- 3We prove notice
Sweep logs, maintenance records, and prior complaints show what the owner knew or should have found. This is where most premises cases are won or lost.
- 4We present the demand
Once your prognosis is clear, a demand goes out with the records, the wage proof, and the liability evidence attached. The first offer back is a negotiating position.
- 5We file if the number is wrong
Filing changes what the insurer risks. Two years from the injury is the outside limit under Code of Civil Procedure section 335.1, and six months against a public entity.
Next steps
Whoever controlled it, and often more than one of them. The duty comes from Civil Code section 1714(a), the standard is ordinary care, and your reason for being there is a fact in the case rather than the rule that decides it. You have to prove the condition was there, that the owner knew or should have found it, and that it hurt you. What ends the case fastest is a missed deadline: two years for a private owner, six months for a public one.
If you do not know which party you are dealing with, that is the normal starting point, and one conversation with us answers it. You can look at our case results, read the profile of Josh Kohanim, or see the rest of our practice areas. There is no fee unless we recover. If your injury happened in Orange County, start on our Santa Ana premises liability page.