http://personalinjurynj.blogspot.com/2011/02/a
partment-injuries-in-new-jersey.html
Kenneth Vercammen & Associates Law Office helps people injured due to the negligence of others. We provide
representation throughout New Jerse. !he insurance companies will not help. "on#t give up$ Our Law Office can
provide e%perienced attorne representation if ou are injured in an accident and suffer a &erious 'njur.
&ometimes( !enants( visitors and deliver persons are injured in fall downs caused ) holes in par*ing lots or trip in
diml lit areas. !enants ma )e injured ) failure to repair )ro*en sidewal*s. &ometimes people trip when an
Apartment +omple% fail to clean up )ro*en or fallen items. No one plans on )eing injured in an accident( whether it
is a fall down or other situation. &pea* with a personal injur attorne immediatel to retain all our rights. !he
Apartment +omple% are responsi)le for the maintenance of their premises which are used ) the pu)lic. 't is the
dut of the Apartment +omple% to inspect and *eep said premises in a safe condition and free from an and all
pitfalls( o)stacles or traps that would li*el cause injur to persons lawfull thereon. 't is further the dut of the
Apartment +omple% to properl and ade,uatel inspect( maintain and *eep the premises free from danger to life(
lim) and propert of persons lawfull and rightfull using same and to warn of an such dangers or ha-ards
thereon. .ou ma )e lawfull upon the premises as a )usiness invitee in the e%ercise of due care on our part( and
solel ) reason of the omission( failure and default of the Apartment +omple%( )e caused to fall down 'f the
Apartment +omple% did not perform their dut to plaintiff to maintain the premises in a safe( suita)le and proper
condition( ou ma )e entitled to ma*e a claim. 'f severel injured( ou can retain an attorne to file a claim for
damages( together with costs of suit. 'njured people can demand trial ) jur.
W/A! !O !0. !O "O A! !/1 A++'"1N! &+1N1 '2 'NJ301"
4. &top . . . do not leave the scene of the accident. +ALL !/1 A563LAN+1( tell them where the accident
occurred and 7as* for medical help if needed8. 9. Notif the propert manager or owner( if possi)le. 'nsist the
o)serve where ou fell. 2or e%ample( if ou fall on an ic sidewal* at an Apartment +omple%( notif the
superintendent or landlord. :. ;et names and addresses of all witnesses Witnesses will )e a tremendous help to ou
in an su)se,uent court action if there is an ,uestion of lia)ilit involved. ;et the names and addresses of as man
witnesses as possi)le. 'f the refuse to identif themselves( jot down the license plate num)ers of their automo)iles.
"o not discuss the accident with the witnesses. "o not give the witnesses# names to anone )ut the police( our
attorne or our insurance compan.
<. While waiting for am)ulance( write down= Accident 'nformation "ate >> !ime >> Location >> Weather >> 0oad
conditions >> "amage >>
?. &ummar of accident >>
@. "iagram of accident location
A. +all an am)ulance. 'f ou have an reason to suspect ou were injured in the accident( go to a hospital
immediatel or see a phsician promptl. .ou#ll want it on record that ou sought treatment right awa( not in a
wee* or so.
B. Write down name of Colice Officers( "epartment and 6adge Num)er( Am)ulance crew( etc.
D. "o not assign or accept )lame for the accident. = !he scene of the accident is not the place to determine fault.
"iscuss the accident onl with the am)ulance and medical personnel( our attorne and with representatives of our
insurance compan. ;ive the other part onl our name and address. = 6e cooperative with the police.
4E. /ave immediate photos ta*en of accident site.
44. +all a personal injur attorne immediatel( not a real estate attorne. +all Kenneth A. Vercammen= !rial
Attorne Attorne At Law 7A:98 ?A9=E?EE When ou need help the most( we will )e read to help ou.
49. Never give a signed statement to the claims adjuster representing the propert owner#s insurance compan. !he
same goes for a phone recording. !he ma )e used against ou in court to den our claim. &pea* with our
personal injur attorne first.
'2 .O3 /AV1 611N 'NJ301" 'N A CA0K'N; LO! "31 !O N1;L';1N+1 O2 !/1 ACA0!51N!
+O5CL1F
't is important that ou == 4. "O NO! discuss our case with anone e%cept our doctors and attorne. 9. "O NO!
ma*e an statements or give out an information. :. "O NO! sign an statements( reports( forms or papers of an
*inds( . <. "O NO! appear at police or other hearings without first consulting with our attorne. 'N2O05 .O30
A!!O0N1. C0O5C!L. of an notice( re,uest or summons to appear at an hearings. ?. 0efer to our attorne
anone who as*s ou to sign anthing or to ma*e an statement or report or who see*s information concerning our
case. @. "irect our doctor and other treatment providers not to furnish or disclose an information concerning our
case to an entit other than our insurance compan without .O3 AN" .O30 A!!O0N1.#& W0'!!1N
C105'&&'ON. A. .ou ma have insurance coverages such as 6lue +ross( 6lue &hield or 5ajor 5edical which
re,uire prompt attention. /owever( )e sure to have our treatment providers send )ills immediatel to all of our
insurance companies. B. Notif our attorne promptl of an new developments. &mall things ma )e important.
Keep our attorne informed. D. 5aintain accurate records of all information and data pertaining to our case. 4E. 'f
ou or an witnesses should move( )e sure to notif our attorne of the new address.
2inancial 0ecover if injured while falling down
4. Kenneth Vercammen /elps 'njured persons A person who is injured as a result of the negligence of another
person is what we in the legal profession refer to as a personal injur claimant. 'n other words( the have )een
injured as a result of an accident( and now wish to prosecute a claim against a negligent propert owner and its
insurance compan. As the attorne of record( we will )e )ringing this action for the injured person. !herefore( '
re,uest that all clients do as much as possi)le to cooperate and help in ever wa. !he purpose of this article is to
descri)e the procedure that we ma follow and give ou sufficient instructions to ena)le ou to assist us in this
underta*ing. Needless to sa( helping us is just another wa of helping ourself.
&idewal* 2all down Lia)ilit +ertain cases impose limited lia)ilit on commercial landowners for injuries to
pedestrians on a)utting sidewal*s. &ee &tewart v. 4E< Wallace &t.( 'nc.( BA N.J. 4<@ 74DB48. !he dut to maintain
the sidewal*s flows from the economic )enefit that a commercial landowner receives from the a)utting sidewal*
and from the landowner#s a)ilit to control the ris* of injur. 'd. at 4?BG "avis v. Cecoreno( @D N.J. 4( B 74DA?8
7holding gas station owner lia)le for injur caused ) pac*ed snow and ice on a)utting sidewal* )ecause Htraffic
was directl )eneficial to his )usiness and enured to his economic )enefitH8. &everal decisions of the Appellate
"ivision delineate the appropriate limits of a commercial propert owner#s lia)ilit for off=premises injuries.
+ritical to those decisions is the premise that a landowner#s lia)ilit ma e%tend )eond the premises for activities
that directl )enefit the landowner. !hus( the owner of a shopping center was not lia)le to a woman who fell on a
dirt path leading from the shopping center to a par*ing lot. &ee +himiente v. Adam +orp.( 994 N.J. &uper. ?BE
74DBA8. 'n +himiente( sidewal*s provided a safe alternative route. 'd. at ?B<. !he dirt path conferred no direct
economic )enefit on the shopping center. ')id. &imilarl( a shopping center on 0oute 99 was not lia)le to a
customer who was struc* ) a car while crossing the highwa. &ee 5ac;rath( supra( 9?@ N.J. &uper. at 9?E=?4(
9?:. A restaurant that provided par*ing on the opposite side of the street( however( had a dut to provide safe
passage from the lot to the restaurant. &ee Warrington v. 6ird( 9E< N.J. &uper. @44 74DB?8( certif. denied( 4E: N.J.
<A: 74DB@8. !he restaurant *new that its patrons would cross the street( and derived a direct economic )enefit from
their use of the path. 'd. at @4A. 2inall( a caterer was found lia)le for the death of a )usiness invitee who was *illed
crossing a count highwa after par*ing her car in a lot the caterer *new or should have *nown the invitee would
use. &ee 5ulrane v. Auletto#s +atering( 9D: N.J. &uper. :4?( certif. denied( > N.J. > 74DD@8. Crominent among the
reasons for the imposition of lia)ilit was the proposition that the use of the lot furthered the caterer#s economic
interest. 'd. at :94. +ritical to the imposition of lia)ilit is a direct economic )enefit to the commercial landowner
from the path ta*en ) the injured part and the a)sence of an alternative route.
4. +lients should provide m office with the following 4. An )ills 9. All /ospital or doctor records in our
possession :. Chotos of scars( cuts( )ruises <. Chotos of damage to our clothes and propert ?. Chotos of accident
site @. 5ajor 5ed +ard A. Castu) if lost time from wor*
9. Attorne= +lient +onfidential 0elationship 2irst( ' want to than* our clients for giving me the opportunit to
assist them in their case. ' am a legal professional and ' have great pride and confidence in the legal services that '
perform for clients during our relationship as attorne=client. 'f ou have concerns a)out our case( please call m
office. 7A:98 ?A9=E?EE We feel that this case is e%tremel important not onl to ou( )ut to this office as well. !his
is not simpl a matter of o)taining just compensation for ou( although that is ver importantG we ta*e professional
pride in guiding our clients carefull through difficult times to a satisfactor conclusion of their cases.
:. "iar We want ou to *eep a diar of our e%periences since our accident. 'n addition to this dail record( we
also as* ou to start descri)ing a single da in the course of our life. 'n other words( descri)e what ou do when
ou get up in the morning( the first thing ou do after ou go to wor*( what tpe of wor* and effort ou put into
our emploment( what activities ou engage in after wor*( etc. 'n other words( we need ou to descri)e the
changes in our wor*ing life( our plaing life( our life as a hus)and or wife or child or parent. 'n our written
description of our da( we would appreciate our e%planation in the greatest detail possi)le and in our own words
how the accident and su)se,uent injuries have affected our life( our personalit( and our outloo*. 0emem)er
that suffering does not entail mere phsical painG suffering can )e emotional and can )e transmitted to our famil(
friends( and co=wor*ers. Keep a diar of all matters concerning this accident=no matter how trivial ou thin* it ma
)e. .ou should include notes on the treatments ou receive( therap( casts( appliances( hospitali-ation( change of
doctors( change of medication( smptoms( recurrence( set)ac*s( disa)ilities and inconveniences. 'f ou have an
dou)t a)out the propriet of including some particular information( please call the office and let us assist ou.
<. 0ecord e%penses .ou can also )egin to set up a sstem for recording the e%penses incurred in conjunction with
our claim in minute detail. 5edical and legal e%penses are a strong part of the value of our lawsuit( so good
records of these e%penses must )e *ept at all times. 2rom time to time( however( there will )e e%penses incurred
that ou must *eep trac* of ourself. We as* ou to ma*e ever effort to avoid an possi)le error or inaccurac as
jurors have a relentless reverence for the truth. Keep our canceled chec*s and our list of e%penses together( for
we will need them at a later date. .our attorne will *eep trac* of our legal e%penses( which ma include costs of
filing( service of complaint( investigation( reports( depositions( witness fees( hospitalI medical records( etc.
?. 'nvestigation and 2iling of +omplaint Crocedurall( the following events occur in most personal injur cases.
2irst( our attorne must complete the investigation. !his will involve the collection of information from our
phsician( our emploer( and our investigator. We will need our doctors to provide us with copies of all )ills(
medical records and possi)l a medical report. When we feel that we have sufficient information to form an opinion
as to the financial e%tent of our damages( we will commence negotiations with the opposition for a settlement. 'f
the insurance compan will not ma*e an ade,uate offer( then a +omplaint and +ase 'nformation &tatement is
prepared ) our attorne. 't is filed in the &uperior +ourt( Law "ivision. .our attorne then will prepare a
summons and have the defendants personall served with the &ummons and +omplaint. !he defendant( through
their insurance compan( must file an HAnswerH within :? das. Kenneth Vercammen#s office generall does not
file a +omplaint until the treating doctor signs an affidavit of merit setting forth wh the injur is permanent and the
diagnostic tests upon which the permanent injur is )ased. .ou will need to spea* with our doctor to as* if ou
have a permanent injur.
@. 'nterrogator Juestions and "iscover !he Answer is followed ) a re,uest for written interrogatories. !hese are
,uestions that must )e answered ) each part. !he &uperior +ourt has set up certain H2orm AH 'nterrogator
Juestions which are contained in the 0ules of +ourt. ;enerall( written interrogatories are followed ) the ta*ing
of depositions( which is recorded testimon given under oath ) an person the opposition wishes to ,uestion. !he
deposition is just as important as the trial itself. 'n the event ou are deposed during the course of this action( ou
will receive detailed instructions as to the procedure and will )e re,uired to watch a videotape. After ta*ing
depositions( the case will )e set down for an Ar)itration. 'f the parties do not settle after the Ar)itration( the case
will )e given a trial call date. Altogether( these procedures ma ta*e from si% months to several ears( and our
patience ma )e sorel tried during this time. /owever( it has )een our e%perience that clients who are forewarned
have a much higher tolerance level for the slowl turning wheels of justice.
A. "octorI !reatment 't will help our case to tell us and our doctors a)out an injur or medical pro)lems )efore
or after our accident. ;ood cases can )e lost ) the injured person concealing or forgetting an earlier or later injur
or medical pro)lem. 'nsurance companies *eep a record of an and all claims against an insurance compan. !he
insurance compan is sure to find out if ou have ever made a previous claim. !ell our doctors all of our
complaints. !he doctor#s records can onl )e as complete as what ou have given. Keep trac* of all prescriptions
and medicines ta*en and the )ills. Also save all )ottles or containers of medicine.
B. 6ills 0etain all )ills which relate to our damages( including medical e%penses( hospital e%penses( drugs and
medicines( therap( appliances( and anthing needed to assist in our recover. 'f possi)le( pa these )ills ) chec*
or mone order( so that a complete record ma )e *ept. 'f this is not possi)le( )e certain to o)tain a complete receipt
with the )ill heading on it( to indicate where the receipt came from and the part issuing it.
D. 1vidence 6e certain to *eep anthing that comes into our possession which might )e used as evidence in our
case( such as shoes( clothing( glasses( photographs( defective machiner( defective parts( foreign su)stances which
ma have )een a factor in our accident( etc. 6e sure to let the office *now that ou have these items in our
possession.
4E. Chotographs !a*e photographs of all motor vehicles( accident site( etc.( that ma )e connected==directl or
indirectl==with our accident. Again( )e sure to let the office *now that ou have such photographs.
44 Keep our attorne advised Keep this office advised at all times with respect to changes in address( important
changes in medical treatment( termination of treatment( termination of emploment( resumption of emploment( or
an other unusual change in our life.
49. Lost wages Keep a complete record of all lost wages. O)tain a statement from our compan outlining the time
ou have lost( the rate of salar ou are paid( the hours ou wor* per wee*( our average wee*l salar( and an
losses suffered as a result of this accident. Where possi)le( also o)tain other tpes of evidence such as ledger sheets(
copies of time cards( canceled chec*s( chec* stu)s( vouchers( pa slips( etc.
4:. New information 'n the event that an new information concerning the evidence in this case comes to our
attention( report this to the attorne immediatel. !his is particularl true in the case of witnesses who have
heretofore )een unavaila)le.
4< "o not discuss the case !he insurance compan ma telephone ou and record the conversation or send an
adjuster 7investigator8 who ma carr a concealed tape recorder. .ou should not discuss our case with anone.
O)viousl( we cannot stress too strongl that ou "O NO! discuss this matter with anone )ut our attorne or
immediate( trusted famil. .ou should sign no documents without the consent of this office. 0emem)er that at all
times ou ma )e photographed and investigated ) the opposition. 'f ou follow the simple precautions which we
have set out in our chec*list( we feel that we will )e a)le to o)tain a fair and appropriate amount for our injuries.
'f ou get an letters from anone in connection with our case( mail or fa% them to our attorne immediatel.
4?. Juestioning 'f an person approaches ou with respect to this accident without our attorne#s permission(
ma*e complete notes regarding the incident. !hese notes should include the name and address of the part( a
description of the person( and a narrative description of what was said or done. 3nder no circumstances should ou
answer an ,uestion7s8. All ,uestions should )e referred to our attorne#s office.
4@. 'nvestigation ) "efendant 'nsurance +ompan Cermit us to reiterate at this time that the opposition#s insurance
compan will in all pro)a)ilit have a team of lawers and investigators wor*ing diligentl to counter our claim.
"uring the course of their investigation( it is ,uite possi)le that the ma attempt to contact ou through various
7and sometimes( devious8 methods. Clease do not ma*e their jo)s an easier for them ) answering their ,uestions.
We cannot emphasi-e too strongl that ou should refrain at all times from discussing this matter with anone==and
that includes our emploer( our relatives( our neigh)ors( and even our friends. Of course( there are e%ceptions
to this rule.
'f there are friends or neigh)ors or relatives who *now all of the facts and circumstances surrounding the accident
and can )e of assistance to ou( then the should )e referred to this office so that their natural smpath can )e
channeled into an effective asset for ou.
'nsurance companies pa mone to claimants when the are satisfied there are )oth lia)ilit and damages that
support a recover. !he can )e e%pected to thoroughl investigate the facts of the accident and an past injuries or
claims. !he insurance compan will o)tain copies of all of the claimant#s past medical records.
!he value of a case depends on the Cermanent 'njur( medical treatment and doctor#s reports 3ndou)tedl( ou
have ,uestions as to how much our case is worth. We are going to )e fran*K !he fact of the matter is there can )e
no answer to this ,uestion until we have completed the investigation in our case. Once we complete our
investigation( of course( we can ma*e a determination as to the amount of the defendant#s lia)ilit( if an( and even
at that we will onl )e at a starting point. After that( we must o)tain all necessar information concerning our lost
wages( our disa)ilit( our partial disa)ilit( our life changes( and our prognosis. .ou ma rest assured of one
thing( however( and that is the fact that our case will not )e settled )elow its true value( that is the fair
compensation for the injuries ou have received. .ou ma also rest assured that no settlement agreement will )e
entered into without our consent.
!he following information is ta*en from the old model jur charges dealing with fall downs ) Apartment +omple%
tenants( visitors or deliver persons. 'NV'!11 = "12'N1" AN" ;1N10AL "3!. OW1" An invitee is one who
is permitted to enter or remain on land 7or premises8 for a purpose of the owner 7or occupier8. /eI&he enters )
invitation( e%pressed or implied. !he owner 7or occupier8 of the land 7or premises8 who ) invitation( e%pressed or
implied( induced persons to come upon hisIher premises( is under a dut to e%ercise ordinar care to render the
premises reasona)l safe for the purposes em)raced in the invitation. !hus( heIshe must e%ercise reasona)le care for
the invitee#s safet. /eI&he must ta*e such steps as are reasona)le and prudent to correct or give warning of
ha-ardous conditions or defects actuall *nown to himIher 7or hisIher emploees8( and of ha-ardous conditions or
defects which heIshe 7or hisIher emploees8 ) the e%ercise of reasona)le care( could discover. 63&'N1&&
'NV'!11 2ALL "OWN&K !he )asic dut of a proprietor of premises to which the pu)lic is invited for )usiness
purposes of the proprietor is to e%ercise reasona)le care to see that one who enters hisIher premises upon that
invitation has a reasona)l safe place to do that which is within the scope of the invitation. NotesK
748 6usiness 'nviteeK !he dut owed to a H)usiness inviteeH is no different than the dut owed to other Hinvitees.H
798 +onstruction "efects( 'ntrinsic and 2oreign &u)stancesK !he rules dealt with in this section and su)se,uent
sections appl mainl to those cases where injur is caused ) transitor conditions( such as falls due to foreign
su)stances or defects resulting from wear and tear or other deterioration of premises which were originall
constructed properl.
Where a ha-ardous condition is due to defective construction or construction not in accord with applica)le
standards it is not necessar to prove that the owner or occupier had actual *nowledge of the defect or would have
)ecome aware of the defect had heIshe personall made an inspection. 'n such cases the owner is lia)le for failing
to provide a safe place for the use of the invitee.
!hus( in 6rod v. Al)ert Lipson & &ons( 4A N.J. :B: 74D??8( the court distinguished )etween a ris* due to the
intrinsic ,ualit of the material used 7calling it an Hintrinsic su)stanceH case8 and a ris* due to a foreign su)stance or
e%tra=normal condition of the premises. !here the case was su)mitted to the jur on the theor that the terra--o
floor was peculiarl lia)le to )ecome slipper when wet ) water and that defendant should have ta*en precautions
against said ris*. !he court appears to reject defendant#s contention that there )e notice( direct or imputed ) proof
of ade,uate opportunit to discover the defective condition. 4A N.J. at :BD.
't ma )e possi)le to reconcile this position with the re,uirement of constructive notice of an unsafe condition )
saing that an owner of premises is chargea)le with *nowledge of such ha-ards in construction as a reasona)le
inspection ) an appropriate e%pert would reveal. &eeK 0estatement to !orts 9d( L:<:( +omment f( pp. 94A=94B
74D@?8( saing that a proprietor is re,uired to have superior *nowledge of the dangers incident to facilities furnished
to invitees.
Alternativel( one can view these cases as within the categor of defective or ha-ardous conditions created )
defendant or ) an independent contractor for which defendant would )e lia)le 7see introductor note a)ove8.
+asesK
6o--a v. Vornado( 'nc.( <9 N.J. :??( :?D 74D?<8 7slip and fall on stic*( slim su)stance in self=service cafeteria
which infera)l fell to the floor as an incident of defendant#s mode of operation8.
6uchner v. 1rie 0ailroad +o.( 4A N.J. 9B:( 9B?=9B@ 74D??8 7trip over cur)stone improperl illuminated8.
6rod v. Al)ert Lifson & &ons( 4A N.J. :B:( :BD 74D??8 7slip and fall on wet composition floor in store8.
6ohn v. /udson & 5anhattan 0. +o.( 4@ N.J. 4BE( 4B? 74D?<8 7slip on smooth stairwa in railroad station8.
Williams v. 5orristown 5emorial /ospital( ?D N.J. &uper. :B<( :BD 7App. "iv. 4D@E8 7fall over low wire fence
separating grass plot from sidewal*8.
Nar v. "over Car*ing Authorit( ?B N.J. super. 999( 99@=99A 7App. "iv. 4D?D8 7fall over )umper )loc* in par*ing
lot8.
Carmenter v. Jarvis "rug &tore 'nc.( <B N.J. &uper. ?EA( ?4E 7App. "iv. 4D?A8 7slip and fall on wet linoleum near
entrance of store on rain da8.
Nelson v. ;reat Atlantic & Cacific !ea +o.( <B N.J. &uper. :EE 7App. "iv. 4D?B8 7inade,uate lighting of par*ing lot
of supermar*et( fall over un*nown o)ject8.
6arnard v. !renton=New 6runswic* !heatre +o.( :9 N.J. &uper. ??4( ??A 7App. "iv. 4D?<8 7fall over ladder placed
in theatre lo)) ) wor*men of independent contractor8.
0atering v. 5ele( 44 N.J. &uper. 944( 94: 7App. "iv. 4D?48 7slip and fall on littered stairwa at entrance to
restaurant8.
"3!. !O 'N&C1+! OW1" !O 'NV'!11 !he dut of an owner 7or occupier8 of land 7or premises8 to ma*e the
place reasona)l safe for the proper use of an invitee re,uires the owner or occupier to ma*e reasona)le inspection
of the land 7or premises8 to discover ha-ardous conditions. +asesK
/andelman v. +o%( :D N.J. D?( 444 74D@:8 7salesman showing merchandise to emploees of defendant fell down
cellar stairwa partiall o)scured ) carton8 NO!'+1 O2 CA0!'+3LA0 "AN;10 A& +ON"'!'ON O2
L'A6'L'!. 'f the jur mem)ers find that the land 7or premises8 was not in a reasona)l safe condition( then( in
order to recover( plaintiff must show either that the owner 7or occupier8 *new of the unsafe condition for a period of
time prior to plaintiff#s injur sufficient to permit himIher in the e%ercise of reasona)le care to have corrected it( or
that the condition had e%isted for a sufficient length of time prior to plaintiff#s injur that in the e%ercise of
reasona)le care the owner 7or occupier8 should have discovered its e%istence and corrected it. +asesK
!ua v. 5odern /omes( 'nc.( @< N.J. &uper. 944 7App. "iv. 4D@E8( affirmed( :: N.J. <A@ 74D@E8 7slip and fall on
small area of slipper wa% li*e su)stance in store8G Carmenter v. Jarvis "rug &tore( 'nc.( <B N.J. &uper. ?EA( ?4E
7App. "iv. 4D?A8 7slip and fall on wet linoleum near entrance of store on rain da8G 0atering v. 5ele( 44 N.J.
&uper. 944( 94: 7App. "iv. 4D?48 7slip and fall on littered stairwa at entrance to restaurant8.
NotesK
748 !he a)ove charge is applica)le to those cases where the defendant is not at fault for the creation of the ha-ard of
where the ha-ard is not to )e reasona)l anticipated as an incident of defendant#s mode of operation. &eeK 5augeri
v. ;reat Atlantic & Cacific !ea +ompan( :?A 2.9d 9E9 7:rd +ir. 4D@@8 7dictum8.
798 An emploee#s *nowledge of the danger is imputed to hisIher emploer( the owner of premises. /andelman v.
+o%( :D N.J. D?( 4E< 74D@:8.
NO!'+1 NO! 01J3'01" W/1N +ON"'!'ON '& +A3&1" 6. "121N"AN! 'f the jur mem)ers find that
the land 7or premises8 was not in a reasona)l safe condition and that the owner 7or occupier8 or hisIher agent(
servant or emploee created that condition through hisIher own act or omission( then( in order for plaintiff to
recover( it is not necessar for the jur mem)ers also to find that the owner 7or occupier8 had actual or constructive
notice of the particular unsafe condition.
+asesK
&mith v. 2irst National &tores( D< N.J. &uper. <@9 7App. "iv. 4D@A8 7slip and fall on greas stairwa caused )
sawdust trac*ed onto the steps ) defendant#s emploees8G Claga v. 2oltis( BB N.J. &uper. 9ED 7App. "iv. 4D@?8 7slip
and fall on fat in restaurant area traversed ) )us )o8G !orda v. ;rand 3nion +o.( ?D N.J. &uper. <4 7App. "iv.
4D?D8 7slip and fall in self=service mar*et on wet floor near vegeta)le )in8. Also seeK !hompson v. ;iant !iger
+orp.( 44B N.J.L. 4E 71. & A. 4D:A8G Wollerman v. ;rand 3nion &tores( 'nc.( <A N.J. <9@ 74D?@8G Lewin v.
Or)ach#s( 'nc.( 4< N.J. &uper. 4D: 7App. "iv. 4D?48G 5augeri v. ;reat Atlantic & Cacific !ea +ompan( :?A 2.9d
9E9 7:rd +ir. 4D@@8.
630"1N O2 ;O'N; 2O0WA0"
'n Wollerman v. ;rand 3nion &tores( 'nc.( <A N.J. <9@( <9D=<:E 74D@@8( the court held that where string )eans are
sold from )ins on a self=service )asis there is a pro)a)ilit that some will fall or )e dropped on the floor either )
defendant#s emploees or ) customers. &ince plaintiff would not )e in a position to prove whether a particular
string )ean was dropped ) an emploee or another customer 7or how long it was on the floor8 a showing of this
tpe of operation is sufficient to put the )urden on the defendant to come forward with proof that defendant did
what was reasona)l necessar 7made periodic inspections and clean=up8 in order to protect a customer against the
ris* of injur li*el to )e generated ) defendant#s mode of operation. Cresuma)l( however( the )urden of proof
remains on plaintiff to prove lac* of reasona)le care on defendant#s part. 'f defendant fails to produce evidence of
reasona)le care( the jur ma infer that the fault was pro)a)l his. &ee alsoK 6o--a( supra( <9 N.J. at :?D.
Whether or not defendant has furnished an invitee with a reasona)l safe place for hisIher use ma depend upon the
o)viousness of the condition claimed to )e ha-ardous and the li*elihood that the invitee would reali-e the ha-ard
and protect himselfIherself against it. 1ven though an unsafe condition ma )e o)serva)le ) an invitee the jur
mem)ers ma find that an owner 7or occupier8 of premises is negligent( nevertheless( in maintaining said condition
when the condition presents an unreasona)le ha-ard to invitees in the circumstances of a particular case. 'f the jur
mem)ers find that defendant was negligent in maintaining an unsafe condition( even though the condition would )e
o)vious to an invitee( the fact that the condition was o)vious should )e considered ) the jur mem)ers in
determining whether the invitee was contri)utoril negligent 7a8 in proceeding in the face of a *nown ha-ard or 7)8
in the manner in which the invitee proceeded in the face of a *nown ha-ard.
"'&!0A+!'ON O0 2O0;1!23LN1&& O2 'NV'!11 1ven if the jur mem)ers find that plaintiff *new of the
e%istence of the unsafe or defective condition( or that the unsafe or defective condition was so o)vious that
defendant had a reasona)le )asis to e%pect that an invitee would reali-e its e%istence( plaintiff ma still recover if
the circumstances or conditions are such that plaintiff#s attention would )e distracted so that heIshe would not
reali-e or would forget the location or e%istence of the ha-ard or would fail to protect himselfIherself against it.
!hus( even where a ha-ardous condition is o)vious the jur mem)ers must first determine whether in the
circumstances the defendant was negligent in permitting the condition to e%ist. 5ere lapse of memor or inattention
or mental a)straction at the critical moment is not an ade,uate e%cuse. One who is inattentive or forgetful of a
*nown and o)vious danger is contri)utoril negligent unless there is some condition or circumstance which would
distract or divert the mind or attention of a reasona)l prudent person. NoteK
'n 5c;rath v. American +anamid +o.( <4 N.J. 9A9 74D@:8( the emploee of a su)contractor was *illed when a
plan* comprising a catwal* over a deep trench up=ended causing him to fall. !he court held that even if the
decedent had appreciated the danger that fact ) itself would not have )arred recover. !he court said if the danger
was one which due care would not have avoided( due care might( nevertheless( re,uire notice of warning unless the
danger was *nown or o)vious. 'f the danger was created ) a )reach of defendant#s dut of care( that negligence
would not )e dissipated merel )ecause the decedent *new of the danger. Negligence would remain( )ut decedent#s
*nowledge would affect the issue of contri)utor negligence. !he issue would remain whether decedent acted as a
reasona)l prudent person in view of the *nown ris*( either ) incurring the *nown ris* 7) staing on the jo)8( or
) the manner in which he proceeded in the face of that ris*.
'n Ment- v. !oop( D9 N.J. &uper. 4E?( 44<=44? 7App. "iv. 4D@@8( affirmed o.).( ?E N.J. 9?E 74D@A8( the emploee of
a roofing contractor( while carring hot tar( tripped over a guide wire supporting an air conditioning tower on a
roof. !he court held that even if plaintiff had o)served the wires or if the were so o)vious that heIshe should have
o)served them( the ,uestion remained whether( considering the ha-ard and the wor* of the emploee( heIshe was
entitled to more than mere *nowledge of the e%istence of the wires or whether heIshe was entitled to a warning )
having the wires flagged or painted in a contrasting color. !his was a fact for the jur to determine. !he jur must
also determine whether defendant had reason to e%pect that the emploee#s attention would have )een distracted as
heIshe wor*ed or that heIshe would forget the location of a *nown ha-ard or fail to protect himself against it. !he
court also held the plaintiff#s *nowledge of the danger would not alone )ar hisIher recover( )ut this *nowledge
goes to the issue of contri)utor negligence.
'n 2errie v. "#Arc( :4 N.J. D9( D? 74D?D8( the court held that there was no reasona)le e%cuse for plaintiff#s
forgetfulness or inattention to the fact that a railing was temporaril a)sent from her porch( as she undertoo* to
throw )ones to her dog( and fell to the ground )ecause of the a)sence of a railing she customaril leaned upon. !he
court heldK
HWhen an injur results from forgetfulness or inattention to a *nown danger( the o)vious contri)utor negligence is
not e%cusa)le in the a)sence of some condition or circumstance which would divert the mind or attention of an
ordinaril prudent man. 5ere lapse of memor( or inattention or mental a)straction at the critical moment cannot )e
considered an ade,uate diversion. One who is inattentive to or forgetful of a *nown and o)vious condition which
contains a ris* of injur is o)vious condition which contains a ris* of injur to guilt of contri)utor negligence as a
matter of law( unless some diversion of the tpe referred to a)ove is shown to have e%isted at the time.H
!he following discussion in 9 /arper & James( !orts( L9A.4:( pp. 4<BD et se,.( 74D?@8( cited with approval in Ment-
v. !oop( supra( D9 N.J. &uper. at 449( ma )e helpful in understanding the principles involved in the a)ove chargesK
Once an occupier has learned of dangerous conditions on hisIher premises( a serious ,uestion arises as to whether
heIshe ma==as a matter of law under all circumstances==discharge all further dut to hisIher invitees ) simpl
giving them Ha warning ade,uate to ena)le them to avoid the harm.H A good man authorities( including the
0estatement( ta*e the position that heIshe ma. 6ut this proposition is a highl dou)tful one )oth on principle and
authorit. !he alternative would )e a re,uirement of due care to ma*e the conditions reasona)l safe==a re,uirement
which might well )e satisfied ) warning or o)viousness in an given case( )ut which would not )e so satisfied
invaria)l.
N N N
4. "efendant#s dut. Ceople can hurt themselves on almost an condition of the premises. !hat is certainl true of an
ordinar flight of stairs. 6ut it ta*es more than this to ma*e a condition unreasona)l dangerous. 'f people who are
li*el to encounter a condition ma )e e%pected to ta*e perfectl good care themselves without further precautions(
then the condition is not unreasona)l dangerous )ecause the li*elihood of harm is slight. !his is true of the flight
of ordinar stairs in a usual place in the dalight. 't is also true of ordinar cur)ing along a sidewal*( doors or
windows in a house( counters in a store( stones and slopes in a New 1ngland field( and countless other things which
are common in our everda e%perience. 't ma also )e true of less common and o)vious conditions which lur* in a
place where visitors would e%pect to find such dangers. !he ordinar person can use or encounter all of these things
safel if heIshe is full aware of their presence at the time. And if the have no unusual features and are in a place
where heIshe would naturall loo* for them( heIshe ma )e e%pected to ta*e care of himself if the are plainl
visi)le. 'n such cases it is enough if the condition is o)vious( or is made o)vious 7e.g.( ) illumination8. N N N
On the other hand( the fact that a condition is o)vious==i.e.( it would )e clearl visi)le to one whose attention was
directed to it==does not alwas remove all unreasona)le danger. 't ma fail to do so in two lines of cases. 'n one line
of cases( people would not in fact e%pect to find the condition where it is( or the are li*el to have their attention
distracted as the approach it( or( for some other reason( the are in fact not li*el to see it( though it could )e
readil and safel avoided if the did. !here ma )e negligence in creating or maintaining such a condition even
though it is phsicall o)viousG slight o)structions to travel on a sidewal* an une%pected step in a store aisle or
)etween a passenger elevator and the landing furnish e%amples. 3nder the circumstances of an particular case( an
additional warning ma( as a matter of fact( suffice to remove the danger( as where a customer( not hurried )
crowds or some emergenc( and in possession of hisIher facilities( is told to Hwatch hisIher stepH or Hstep upH at the
appropriate time. When this is the case( the warning satisfies the re,uirement of due care and is incompati)le with
defendant#s negligence. /ere again( plaintiff#s recover would )e prevented ) that fact no matter how careful
heIshe was. 6ut under ordinar negligence principles the ,uestion is properl one of fact for the jur e%cept in the
clearest situations.
'n the second line of cases the condition of danger is such that it cannot )e encountered with reasona)le safet even
if the danger is *nown and appreciated. An ic flight of stairs or sidewal*( a slipper floor( a defective crosswal*( or
a wal*wa near an e%posed high tension wire ma furnish e%amples. &o ma the less dangerous *ind of condition if
surrounding circumstances are li*el to force plaintiff upon it( or if( for an other reason( hisIher *nowledge is not
li*el to )e a protection against danger. 't is in these situations that the )it of the 0estatement#s Hade,uate warningH
rule is felt. /ere( if people are in fact li*el to encounter the danger( the dut of reasona)le care to ma*e conditions
reasona)l safe is not satisfied ) a simple warningG the pro)a)ilit of harm in spite of such precaution is still
unreasona)l great. And the )oo*s are full of cases in which defendants( owing such a dut( are held lia)le for
creating or maintaining a perfectl o)vious danger of which plaintiffs are full aware. !he 0estatement( however(
would den lia)ilit here )ecause the occupier need not invite visitors( and if heIshe does( heIshe ma condition the
invitation on an terms heIshe chooses( so long as there is full disclosure of them. 'f the invitee wishes to come on
those terms( heIshe assumes the ris*.
!he 0estatement view is wrong in polic. !he law has never freed landownership or possession from all restrictions
or o)ligations imposed in the social interest. !he possessor#s dut to use care towards those outside the land is of
long standing. And man o)ligations are imposed for the )enefit of people who voluntaril come upon the land. 2or
the invitee( the occupier must ma*e reasona)le inspection and give warning of hidden perils. . . 6ut this should not
)e conclusive. 0easona)le e%pectations ma raise duties( )ut the should not alwas limit them. !he gist of the
matter is unreasona)le pro)a)ilit of harm in fact. And when that is great enough in spite of full disclosure( it is
carring the ,uasi=sovereignt of the landowner prett far to let him ignore it to the ris* of life and lim).
&o far as authorit goes( the orthodo% theor is getting to )e a prett fee)le reed for defendants to lean on. 't is still
fre,uentl stated( though often ) wa of dictum. On the other hand( some cases have simpl==though
unostentatiousl==)ro*en with tradition and held defendant lia)le to an invitee in spite of hisIher *nowledge of the
danger( when the danger was great enough and could have )een feasi)l remedied. Other cases stress either the
reasona)le assumption of safet which the invitee ma ma*e or the li*elihood that hisIher attention will )e
distracted( in order to cut down the notion of what is o)vious or the ade,uac of warning. And the latter is often a
jur ,uestion even under the 0estatement rule. 't is not surprising( then( that relativel few decisions have depended
on the 0estatement rule alone for dening lia)ilit.
9. +ontri)utor Negligence. . . 6ut there are several situations in which a plaintiff will not )e )arred ) contri)utor
negligence although heIshe encountered a *nown danger. . . 2or another( it is not necessaril negligent for a plaintiff
*nowingl and deli)eratel to encounter a danger which it is negligent for defendant to maintain. !hus a traveler
ma *nowingl use a defective sidewal*( or a tenant a defective common stairwa( without )eing negligent if the
use was reasona)le under all the circumstances.
+onclusion We appreciate that this is a great deal of information to a)sor). /owever( we are certain that our clients
appreciate having this information from the outset. 1ach re,uest and )it of information given here represents an
important part in recovering full value for our injur. !herefore( we respectfull re,uest our full cooperation. 'f
ou have ,uestions or concerns regarding these instructions( we encourage ou to feel free to contact the office at
an time. !hese situations show that the invitee will not alwas )e )arred ) hisIher self=e%posure to *nown
dangers on the premises.
is important to clean our wounds. Additionall( ou should see* medical attention and advice regarding ra)ies
treatment. 'f ou are not familiar with the dog or its owner( contact our local animal control )oard and report the
incident. Animal control officers ma )e a)le to locate the dog and determine its ra)ies vaccination status. &ee our
doctor if ou have )een injured ) a dog or other animal. 'n addition( it ma )e important to contact us to help ou
protect our legal rights. Clease *eep in mind that there are time limits within which ou must commence suit. 'f
someone hops our fence( trespasses on our land( and our dog )ites him( ou are not lia)le. /owever( New Jerse
does impose strict lia)ilit if our dog )ites someone if it is loose or if the person )itten was in a pu)lic place or
permitted on our propert. NJ&A <K4D=4@ providesK H!he owner of an dog which shall )ite a person while such
person is on or in a pu)lic place( or lawfull on or in a private place( including the propert of the owner of the dog(
shall )e lia)le for such damages as ma )e suffered ) the person )itten( regardless of the former viciousness of
such dog or the owner#s *nowledge of such viciousness. H2or the purpose of the New Jerse &tatute <K4D=4@( a
person is lawfull upon the private propert of such owner when he is on the propert in the performance of an
dut imposed upon him ) the laws of this state or the laws or postal regulations of the 3nited &tates( or when he is
on such propert upon the invitation( e%press or implied( of the owner thereof.H !hus( in New Jerse( a dog does not
get two )ites. A person can even )e lia)le if our dog or other pet or animal injures someone although not )iting it.
6eing jumped on or chased ) a dog could )e grounds for a civil lia)ilit. 't is also strict lia)ilit if an of our
dangerous animals injure someone( i.e. pet( )uffalo or tiger.
2or the purpose of this state law( a person is lawfull upon the private propert of such owner when heIshe is on the
propert in the performance of an dut imposed upon him ) the laws of this state or the laws or postal regulations
of the 3nited &tates( or when heIshe is on such propert upon the invitation( e%press or implied( of the owner
thereof. 'n deciding whether the plaintiff was on or in a pu)lic place or lawfull on or in a private place( including
the propert of the defendant( ou should note that anone whose presence is e%pressl or impliedl permitted on
the propert is entitled to the protection of the statute. !he permission e%tends to all areas where the plaintiff ma
reasona)l )elieve to )e included within its scope. "e0o)ertis v. 0anda--o( D< N.J. 4<< 74DB:8. 'n a case such as
this where the defendant has raised the negligence of the plaintiff as a defense( the defendant has the )urden of
proof. !his means that the defendant has the )urden to prove plaintiff#s Hunreasona)le and voluntar e%posure to a
*nown ris*.H !his means that the plaintiff H*newH the dog had a propensit to )ite either )ecause of the dog#s *nown
viciousness or )ecause of the plaintiff#s deli)erate acts intended to incite the animal. 2or e%ample( one who )eats or
torments a dog has no call upon the owner if in self=defense the dog )ites )ac*. 6udai v. !eague( 949 N.J. &uper.
?99 7Law "iv. 4DB@8G see also "ranow v. Kolmar( D9 N.J.L. 44<( 44@=4A 74D4B8. 'n conclusion( a New Jerse dog
does not get two )ites.
!he law imposes upon the landlord or owner of an commercial or )usiness propert the dut to use reasona)le
care to see to it that the sidewal*s and common areas are reasona)l safe for residents and mem)ers of the pu)lic
who are using them. 'n other words( the law sas that the landlord or owner of a commercial propert must e%ercise
reasona)le care to see to it that the condition of hallwas and sidewal*s are reasona)l safe and does not su)ject
pedestrians to an unreasona)le ris* of harm. !he concept of reasona)le care re,uires the landlord or owner of a
commercial propert to ta*e action with regard to conditions within a reasona)le period of time after the owner
)ecomes aware of the dangerous condition or( in the e%ercise of reasona)le care( should have )ecome aware of it.
Cedestrians have a right to )e protected from animal attac*s.
W/A! !O "O '2 A!!A+K1" 6. AN AN'5AL= A! !/1 A++'"1N! &+1N1
+ompiled ) Kenneth Vercammen( 1s,. from various sources
4. Crotect ourself from further attac*( )ut tr to sta at or near the scene +ALL !/1 COL'+1( tell them where the
accident occurred and 7as* for medical help if needed8. 9. ;et names( address of the animal owner :. ;et names(
address of the propert owner
<. ;et names and addresses of all witnesses Witnesses will )e a tremendous help to ou in an su)se,uent court
action if there is an ,uestion of lia)ilit involved. ;et the names and addresses of as man witnesses as possi)le.
?. While waiting for police( write down= Accident 'nformation "ate >> !ime >> Location >>
@. &ummar of accident >>
A. "iagram of accident
B. +all an am)ulance. 'f ou have an reason to suspect ou were injured in the accident( go to a hospital
immediatel or see a phsician promptl. .ou#ll want it on record that ou sought treatment right awa( not in a
wee* or so .
D. O)tain name of Colice Officers( "epartment and 6adge Num)er
4E. = 6e cooperative with the police.
44. +all a personal injur attorne( not a real estate attorne K +all Kenneth A. Vercammen= !rial Attorne Attorne
At Law 7A:98 ?A9=E?EE When ou need help the most( we will )e read to help ou.
2inancial 0ecover for persons injured ) animal attac*
4. Kenneth Vercammen /elps 'njured persons A person who is injured as a result of the negligence of another
person is what we in the legal profession refer to as a personal injur claimant. 'n other words( the have )een
injured as a result of an accident( and now wish to prosecute a claim against an opposing part. As the attorne of
record( ' will )e )ringing this action for the injured person. !herefore( ' re,uest that all clients do as much as
possi)le to cooperate and help in ever wa.
9. +lients should provide m office with the following 4. An )ills 9. All /ospital or doctor records in our
possession :. Chotos of damage to our clothes and propert <. Chotos of accident site ?. 5ajor 5ed +ard @.
Castu) if lost time from wor*