If you hope to win such a claim, then you must understand what legal proofs you must include in your argument, in the event that the case were to be heard in a courtroom. In order to come up with those proofs, you must obtain the answers for 2 sets of questions.
• Was there a dangerous condition at the site where you slipped, or tripped, and fell?
• Had that condition existed long enough for the property owner to discover it, and to have it fixed?
• Had the property owner become aware of the existence of that dangerous condition?
• If he had become aware of the presence of that condition, had he acted appropriately? Had he made an effort to have it fixed?
• Had the property owner caused creation of the dangerous condition that caused you to trip or slip and fall?
• Had the owner taken the proper action, in order to correct that problem?
• Did the property owner make a point of checking for hazards?
Plaintiffs win by asking the right questions, and by having the right answer to any question from the defense personal injury lawyers in Thousand Oaks.
Could the plaintiff clear up any confusion about his/her right to be at the spot where the slip and fall incident took place?
Could the plaintiff counter any claim that he/she had failed to heed posted warning notices?
What about any allegation that he/she had ignored a warning that had been included in a phone call?
What about any allegation that he/she had ignored a warning letter, or other form of written communication, such as an email or text message?
Could the plaintiff address any doubts about his/her ability to pay attention to the objects in the path that he/she had taken, before experiencing the falling incident?
Would the collection of the plaintiff’s evidence include the footwear that he/she was wearing on the day of the slip and fall incident?
Would that same footwear appear substantial in nature?
Could the plaintiff’s response to this question display the needed level of confidence: Did anyone force you to go to that particular spot?
Winning plaintiffs also have consistent answers.
Their answers do not change, when a defense attorney addresses subjects such as these:
Why had the victim/plaintiff chosen to go to the spot where the falling accident took place?
What had the victim/plaintiff been doing, before venturing to that specific spot?
Had the victim/plaintiff ever been to that same location in the past?
During the recovery, had the victim/plaintiff followed all of the instructions given by the treating physician?
During the recovery, had the victim/plaintiff ever attempted any action that the doctor had warned him/her not to make? If yes, what happened?