Articles Tagged with Boston premises liability

Published on:

When a plaintiff is on someone else’s property and is injured as a result of some dangerous condition on the property, the type of legal action likely to be filed is known as a premises liability case.  A Boston premises liability cases is plead under a theory of negligence and alleges that the defendant did not maintain the property in such as condition so as to make it reasonably safe for lawful entrants onto the land.premises liability

Standard of Care in Boston Premises Liability Cases

In Massachusetts, the law regarding the duty of due care owed to lawful occupants on the property was drastically altered as compared to what it was and still is in many other states in a 1973 cases captioned Wilbur M. Mounsey v. P. Ellard & Another (363 Mass. 693).   Prior to this case, the law required a distinction between invitees and licensees when determining if the landowner owed a duty of due care to maintain the property in a safe condition and warn lawful occupants of known, yet hidden, dangers. Continue reading

Published on:

When we talk about personal injury cases, we are typically talking about someone being injured through the negligence of others.  Negligence is one type of tort (a civil wrong for which the law provides a remedy), which is the most common claim in a Boston personal injury case.

Slip and Fall Boston If you are injured on someone else’s property, and the cause of your injury was largely the result the negligence of the property owner or manager, then you will likely have grounds to file a premises liability lawsuit. Continue reading

Published on:

In Regalado v. Callaghan, defendant was a subcontractor with a license to do concrete jobs and wanted to build his wife’s dream house according to court records.  In order to save money on the project, defendant chose to be the owner-builder of his new home.

1341083_neglected_poolAccording to the relevant state regulation in the jurisdiction, an owner-builder can personally obtain all necessary permits and serve in the place of a general contractor in terms of responsibility on the project.  Once he had obtained the proper permits, he did all of the concrete work himself and then hired subcontractors to perform the other needed work. Continue reading

Published on:

The Iowa Supreme Court has set for retrial the case of Alcala v. Marriott Int’l, Inc., a slip-and-fall case that involves a hotel business guest who was injured after a fall on an ice-slicked walkway on the property. icewalk

Boston residents are well familiar with the phenomenon of ice and snow during the brutal winter months. Of course, it’s not something many want to spend time thinking about at the start of summer, but it’s worth keeping abreast of legal developments on this front because it does affect many in Massachusetts for a good six months out of the year.

In Massachusetts, the 2010 ruling of Papadopoulos v. Target Corp. upended the previous slip-and-fall standard when it came to snow and ice, which was that there was no liability for naturally-accumulated ice and snow, but there was for unnaturally-accumulated ice and snow. The Maine Supreme Judicial Court held that a property owner owed a duty to lawful visitors in both cases to protect them from hazards arising from snow and ice. Whether a property owner’s action is “reasonable” will depend on a myriad of factors, including likelihood of injury, probable seriousness of such injuries and how great a burden it is to reduce or avoid that risk altogether.  Continue reading