Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet consectetur Neque dictum ut sagittis

Testimonials | Immigration, Auto & Personal Injury Law | Minneapolis



Premises Liability FAQ

April 20, 2024 – Paul W. Schroepfer & Robert A. Correia

Immigration, Auto & Personal Injury Lawyer in Minneapolis, MN

Minneapolis, Minnesota Premises Liability Frequently Asked Questions

What should I do immediately following a premises liability accident in Minnesota?

After suffering a personal injury in a premises liability accident on someone’s property, an injured person should first seek medical attention. For serious injuries, call 911; otherwise, visit the emergency room of a hospital or a walk-in clinic.

Next, accident victims should report the incident to the owner of the property. Depending on the circumstances, you should also contact the police to request an official report.

If possible, take photos of the scene and ask any witnesses to the accident for their observations. From there, contact a premises liability attorney in Minneapolis.

What is contributory negligence in a premises liability claim?

Contributory negligence refers to an injured person being partially responsible for their accident and the ensuing personal injury. Under Minnesota’s comparative fault law, if it’s determined that you are less than 50% responsible for your accident, your percentage of fault is deducted from your recovery amount.

Hypothetically, let’s say you are 20 percent at fault for your accident: If your total recovery is $100,000, your recovery would be reduced to $80,000. However, if you are deemed to be 50 percent or more at fault for your accident, you won’t recover any damages.

Be honest with your Minnesota premises liability attorney, who can counsel you regarding evaluation of damages and strategy for your premises liability case.

What is an attractive nuisance in a Minnesota premises liability claim?

The attractive nuisance doctrine is a legal principle that holds property owners responsible for injuries to children who trespass on their property if an object or condition that is likely to attract children causes injuries. This doctrine recognizes that children may be unable to appreciate the dangers posed by certain attractive nuisances, such as swimming pools, trampolines, or abandoned appliances.
Occupiers of property have a duty to take reasonable measures to prevent harm to children, such as fencing off hazardous areas or securing potentially dangerous items.

Do different rules apply to trespassers in a Minnesota premises liability case?

Yes. Generally, occupiers of property are not liable for injuries sustained on their property by adult trespassers. They do not owe trespassers a duty of care or a responsibility to warn them of hidden dangers. However, the attractive nuisance doctrine exempts children from this rule. Cases involving children follow the attractive nuisance doctrine.

Related Blog Posts