Attorney Advertising
Los Angeles premises liability lawyer
Slip-and-fall, stair-collapse, hotel pool, parking-structure, and inadequate-security cases tried under the Rowland v. Christian framework that still controls California premises law.
Call (888) 528-8595 for a free consultation
Reach a lawyer 24/7. The consultation is free. You owe no fee unless we recover for you. Seven California offices: Sherman Oaks (HQ), Glendale, Beverly Hills, Irvine, Bakersfield, Visalia, and Modesto.
$1B+
Recovered for clients
What "premises liability" actually means in Los Angeles
Premises liability is the area of California tort law that decides when a property owner, tenant, hotel, restaurant, retailer, apartment landlord, or business has to pay for an injury that happened on the property. The doctrinal answer comes from Rowland v. Christian (1968) 69 Cal.2d 108, which abolished the old invitee-licensee-trespasser distinction and replaced it with a unified duty of ordinary care, balanced through seven foreseeability and policy factors. Los Angeles County has the volume of foot traffic, retail floor area, hospitality density, and apartment-stock age that produces these cases at a steady rate, and the LA Superior Court Stanley Mosk Civil Courthouse hears more of them than any single venue in the state.
The cases that come through a Los Angeles premises practice are not all slip-and-fall. They include big-box retailer floor incidents and parking-lot strikes, hotel and restaurant swimming-pool injuries (regulated by California Health & Safety Code §115921 et seq.), apartment-building stair and balcony failures, escalator entrapment, parking-structure assaults under the Ann M. inadequate-security framework, dog bites under California's strict-liability statute (Civil Code §3342), and code-violation fall cases tied to the LA County and City Building Codes. The legal mechanics differ across the cases; the underlying duty inquiry is the same.
A premises case turns on three working questions. Did the defendant owe the plaintiff a duty? Did the defendant breach that duty? Did the breach cause the injury? Burg & Brock's premises practice is led by Isaac Radnia, a senior trial attorney who handles slip-and-fall, motor-vehicle, and dog-bite cases out of the Sherman Oaks headquarters and the Beverly Hills office.
One detail worth understanding before any insurance call: the property's surveillance video is the single most decisive piece of evidence in most modern premises cases, and most retention policies overwrite that video within thirty days. Big-box retailers, hotels, parking structures, apartment lobbies, and restaurants almost all run continuous CCTV; the question is whether the recording covering the moment of the incident still exists when the lawyer asks for it. A spoliation letter sent within the first week of representation freezes that footage and locks the property's defense to what the actual video shows. Without that letter, the carrier gets to characterize the fall after the recording is gone. Burg & Brock issues spoliation letters as a same-day-of-retention task. Below: the rights, the case mechanics, and the operational answers clients need on the first call.
Your rights under California law
An LA premises case is built from three layers of California law: the statutory duty layer, the case-law-developed duty refinements, and the underlying damages framework that applies to all personal-injury cases. Knowing how those three layers interact matters because the carrier defending the case will use any gap between them to shrink the claim. The statutes are short and rarely fight back; the case law is where most of the work happens; and the damages framework is what ultimately translates an injury into a number.
The premises framework rests on three California rules and three controlling cases.
- Civil Code §1714(a) — California's general negligence duty.
- Code of Civil Procedure §335.1 — two-year statute of limitations for personal-injury claims.
- Civil Code §3342 — strict liability for dog-bite injuries on public or lawfully-private property.
- California Health & Safety Code §115921 et seq. — pool fencing, drain covers, and barrier rules for hotels, motels, apartments, and homeowners.
- California Civil Code §1812.620 — innkeeper and hotel-operator obligations relevant to hospitality premises injuries.
Three controlling cases
- Rowland v. Christian (1968) 69 Cal.2d 108 — abolished the trichotomy and established the seven-factor duty test that still governs.
- Ortega v. Kmart Corp. (2001) 26 Cal.4th 1200 — addresses constructive notice; how long a hazard has to exist before a reasonable inspection would have discovered it, and the inferences a jury can draw from the absence of inspection records.
- Ann M. v. Pacific Plaza Shopping Center (1993) 6 Cal.4th 666 — the inadequate-security framework, requiring heightened foreseeability for the duty to provide third-party-criminal-act protection (later refined in Sharon P. v. Arman, Ltd. and Delgado v. Trax Bar & Grill).
Recoverable damages in a premises case follow standard California personal-injury rules: past and future medical, lost income and earning capacity, the reasonable cost of household services, pain and suffering, emotional distress, loss of consortium, and — when conduct is malicious, oppressive, or fraudulent — punitive damages under Civil Code §3294.
How Burg & Brock works your case
A premises case is built in six phases. The early phases are time-critical because the evidence does not survive without intervention; the later phases are valuation-driven and depend on a complete medical picture.
- Same-day evidence preservation. Spoliation letters to the property owner, manager, and any tenant in control. Surveillance video, sweep logs, inspection records, and incident reports get preserved before they are routinely overwritten.
- Site inspection. Our investigator photographs the hazard, measures the relevant geometry (riser heights, tread depths, slope, lighting illuminance), and documents any code violation under the LA County or City Building Code.
- Expert engagement. A premises-safety expert, a flooring or stair specialist, a lighting expert, or a security-industry expert depending on the case.
- Medical roadmap. Treatment guides the case. We coordinate orthopedic, neurology, and physical-medicine workups as needed, and route to physiatrists who routinely testify.
- Demand structured for trial. Liability proof, damages model, and policy-limit analysis. Insurers respond differently when the demand reads like a closing argument.
- Litigation track. If the carrier underpays, we file. Cases are tried at Stanley Mosk and Spring Street Courthouse for general civil and complex civil tracks.
Two practical points clients should hear in the first call. First, the property's incident report is a document the plaintiff is entitled to in discovery, but the version the property hands a fall victim on the day of the incident is rarely the version that survives in the carrier's file. Always ask for a copy on the day of the fall, but treat the formal version produced in discovery as the operative document. Second, a pure liability denial in a plaintiff's first letter from the carrier is not the carrier's final position; it is an opening play. Cases that look closed on the liability side at week three regularly end with policy-limit demands paid in full at month eighteen after the right experts have been deposed.
Common Los Angeles premises liability cases
Big-box retailer slip-and-fall. Spilled liquids, produce on the floor, freezer-aisle ice. Constructive-notice cases under Ortega.
Hotel and restaurant pool incidents. Drain entrapment, missing fencing, lifeguard absence; Health & Safety Code §115921 et seq.
Apartment stair and balcony collapses. Code violations, deferred maintenance, dry-rot failure. SB-721 inspection-record analysis.
Parking-structure assaults. Inadequate-security framework under Ann M., Sharon P., and Delgado.
Escalator and elevator injuries. Common-carrier duty under Civil Code §2100; ASME A17.1 compliance review.
Sidewalk and trip-and-fall. LA City and County code obligations on adjacent property owners; trivial-defect defense work.
Dog bites. Strict liability under Civil Code §3342; landlord liability under Donchin v. Guerrero.
Falling-object injuries. Retail shelf collapses, store displays, parking-structure debris.
Negligent maintenance of common areas. Apartment lighting, pool decks, lobby flooring, gym equipment.
Construction-zone injuries on accessible private property.
Common causes
- Failure to inspect, sweep, or document inspection of high-traffic floor areas.
- Code violations under the California Building Code, including stair geometry (CBC Chapter 10) and handrail requirements.
- Pool fencing, drain-cover, and lifeguard requirements under Health & Safety Code §115921 et seq.
- Inadequate lighting in parking structures and stairwells (illuminance below industry standards).
- Failure to repair known hazards after notice; failure to warn of latent hazards.
- Escalator and elevator maintenance failures inconsistent with ASME A17.1.
- Inadequate security where prior similar incidents made third-party criminal acts foreseeable.
- Apartment balcony and stair maintenance failures where SB-721 inspection records are missing or document deficiencies.
Liability theories
Premises cases routinely have multiple potentially liable parties:
- The property owner.
- The tenant in control of the area where the injury occurred.
- The property-management company.
- A maintenance vendor under contract for the area in question.
- A security vendor in inadequate-security cases.
- A neighboring landowner where the hazard crossed property lines.
- A government entity for sidewalk and public-property cases under Government Code §835, with the §911.2 claim deadline.
How damages break down
Economic damages
- Past and future medical bills
- Surgical, hospital, and rehabilitation costs
- Prescription medication and durable medical equipment
- Lost wages and reduced earning capacity
- Home and vehicle modifications
- Out-of-pocket expenses tied to the injury
Non-economic damages
- Physical pain and suffering
- Emotional distress and PTSD
- Loss of consortium for spouses
- Loss of enjoyment of life
- Disfigurement and scarring
- Loss of bodily function
Punitive damages
- Available under Civil Code §3294
- Requires clear and convincing evidence of malice, oppression, or fraud
- Drunk-driving and grossly reckless conduct can qualify
- Calibrated to defendant's wealth and conduct
- Designed to deter, not just compensate
- Appellate review limits the multiplier
Reported settlement and verdict ranges
| Case profile | Injuries | Reported range |
|---|
| Big-box slip-and-fall, hip fracture | Surgical fixation, lasting limitation | $200k–$1.2M typical CA disclosure range |
| Hotel pool drowning, non-fatal hypoxic injury | Anoxic brain injury, long-term care | $2M–$10M+ depending on coverage |
| Apartment stair collapse | Multiple fractures, surgical repair | $500k–$3M depending on liability allocation |
| Inadequate-security assault, parking structure | Catastrophic injury, lifetime impact | $1.5M–$8M depending on foreseeability proof |
| Sidewalk trip-and-fall, knee surgery | Meniscus repair, ongoing treatment | $75k–$400k typical disclosure range |
Past results do not guarantee future outcomes. Settlement values turn on liability, severity, insurance limits, and case-specific facts.
Why work with Burg & Brock
Burg & Brock has tried premises cases out of Los Angeles for more than two decades. The premises practice is led by Isaac Radnia, Cal Bar verification #252402, who has handled motor-vehicle, slip-and-fall, and dog-bite cases throughout California. The firm staffs cases with the named attorney, an in-house investigator, and a working bench of premises-safety experts, biomechanical engineers, lighting and security specialists, and forensic economists.
- Seven California offices: Sherman Oaks (HQ), Glendale, Beverly Hills, Irvine, Bakersfield, Visalia, Modesto.
- Members of the Consumer Attorneys of California and Consumer Attorneys Association of Los Angeles.
- Contingency fee under California Rule of Professional Conduct 1.5. No fee unless we recover.
Seven steps after the premises injury
- Get medical care. An ER visit creates a contemporaneous record. Even mild head impact warrants an evaluation.
- Report to the property. Get an incident report. Insist on a copy. Note the time, the location, the conditions, and the names of any employees who responded.
- Photograph everything. The hazard. The lighting. Adjacent signage. The shoes you were wearing. Time-stamp matters.
- Identify witnesses. Names and phone numbers. Memories degrade in days; records get overwritten in weeks.
- Preserve clothing and shoes. They will be evidence in any sole-traction or floor-traction analysis.
- Decline recorded statements from the property's insurer without counsel. Adjusters are trained to lock plaintiffs into damaging language.
- Talk to a lawyer before signing. Releases, medical authorizations, and "courtesy checks" all carry traps.
Two-year clock under Code of Civil Procedure §335.1. California gives an injured person two years from the date of injury to file a personal-injury lawsuit
(
CCP §335.1). Government-entity claims have a much shorter six-month deadline under
Government Code §911.2. Miss either deadline and the claim is gone.
Where these cases are filed
The Los Angeles Superior Court routes civil personal-injury filings to specific courthouses based on the location of the incident and the parties. Cases tied to this practice area typically land at:
- Stanley Mosk Courthouse — 111 N. Hill Street, Los Angeles (general civil for downtown and central-LA cases)
- Spring Street Courthouse — 312 N. Spring Street, Los Angeles (complex civil)
- Van Nuys East Courthouse — 6230 Sylmar Avenue, Van Nuys (San Fernando Valley premises cases)
Talk to a Los Angeles premises attorney before any insurer call
No fee unless we win. Consultations are confidential.
Call (888) 528-8595
Frequently asked questions
What is the legal standard for a slip-and-fall case in California after Rowland?
Rowland v. Christian (1968) 69 Cal.2d 108 abolished the historical invitee-licensee-trespasser distinction and replaced it with a duty of ordinary care to all persons on the property, balanced through seven foreseeability and policy factors. The plaintiff must prove the defendant owed a duty, breached it, and caused the injury. Ortega v. Kmart (2001) 26 Cal.4th 1200 fills in the constructive-notice piece — how long a hazard had to exist before reasonable inspection would have discovered it. The two cases together control most modern slip-and-fall analysis.
How do I prove the property owner knew about the hazard?
Three ways. Actual notice — an employee saw the hazard, a customer reported it, an incident log noted it. Constructive notice under Ortega — the hazard existed long enough that a reasonable inspection should have caught it; sweep logs, inspection schedules, and surveillance video build or break the inference. Negligent mode of operation — the property's chosen way of doing business, like self-service produce displays, made the hazard foreseeable as a recurring condition. The right theory depends on the facts.
What is the statute of limitations for a premises liability case in California?
Two years from the date of the injury under
Code of Civil Procedure §335.1. If a public entity is involved — sidewalk against a city, library injury against the County — a written tort claim must be filed within six months under
Government Code §911.2. Missing either deadline is normally fatal to the claim.
Can I sue the apartment building's owner if I was assaulted in the parking structure?
Possibly. The inadequate-security framework comes from Ann M. v. Pacific Plaza Shopping Center (1993) 6 Cal.4th 666 and was refined in Sharon P. v. Arman, Ltd. and Delgado v. Trax Bar & Grill. The duty depends on foreseeability, which usually requires evidence of similar prior incidents on the property or in the immediate neighborhood, balanced against the burden of additional precautions. Cases turn on prior-incident data, lighting compliance, and security-industry standards.
If I tripped on a sidewalk, who is responsible — the city or the adjoining property owner?
Both can be. The City of Los Angeles and the County maintain the public right-of-way; under the Streets and Highways Code §5610 series, the abutting property owner has obligations for maintenance of certain sidewalk areas as well. The Tort Claims Act six-month deadline applies to the public-entity side. The trivial-defect doctrine — well-developed California case law — limits recovery for height differentials below a fact-specific threshold; this is fought case by case.
Are dog-bite cases handled the same way as other premises cases?
No.
Civil Code §3342 imposes strict liability on the dog's owner — no negligence proof required — for bites on a public place or while the victim is lawfully on private property. Landlord liability under
Donchin v. Guerrero (1995) 34 Cal.App.4th 1832 requires actual knowledge of the dog's dangerous propensities. Strict-liability dog-bite claims are easier on the liability side but the damages model still drives the case value.
My fall happened in a chain restaurant. Does that change the case?
Not legally. The duty analysis is the same. Practically, chain operations carry larger insurance towers and more complete inspection-and-sweep documentation, which can cut for or against the plaintiff depending on whether the documentation shows compliance or shows the lapse. Discovery in chain-defendant cases is more aggressive — corporate-policy depositions, retention-policy review, and incident-history production matter.
How is pain and suffering valued in a premises case?
There is no formula. The jury is instructed under CACI 3905A to award what is reasonable based on the evidence. The drivers in practice are the severity and duration of the injury, the medical course, the long-term physical and emotional impact, the credibility of the plaintiff and treating physicians, and the venue. Carriers apply rough multipliers to medical specials at the demand stage; the jury is not bound by any multiplier.
How does the Tort Claims Act change a public-property case?
It changes both the timeline and the proof. The six-month written claim under
Government Code §911.2 is jurisdictional. The substantive duty under
Government Code §835 requires the plaintiff to prove a dangerous condition of public property, that the entity had actual or constructive notice in time to take protective measures, and that the condition caused the injury. Trivial-defect and design-immunity defenses are common.
Will my case settle or go to trial?
Most premises cases settle. Settlement value tracks what a jury would do at trial. We prepare every catastrophic case for trial from day one; settlement, when it comes, comes at trial-grade value. The cases that try are usually those where liability is closely contested or the carrier's authority is below a reasonable jury range.
Can I still recover if I was partly at fault for the fall?
Yes. California is a pure comparative-fault state under Li v. Yellow Cab (1975) 13 Cal.3d 804. A jury assigns a percentage of fault to each party and your recovery is reduced — not eliminated — by your share. Even a 70 percent allocation against the plaintiff leaves a 30 percent recovery on the table. Carriers routinely overstate the plaintiff's share at the demand stage; an attorney challenges that allocation with reconstruction and expert testimony.
How does Burg & Brock charge for a premises case?
Contingency. We advance the costs of investigation, experts, and litigation, and earn a fee only if there is a recovery. The percentage is fixed in writing at the start of the representation, governed by California Rule of Professional Conduct 1.5. There is no out-of-pocket cost during the case. If there is no recovery, the client owes nothing for fees.
Reviewed by
Senior Trial Attorney, Motor Vehicle & Premises Liability
Areas of practice: Premises liability, slip-and-fall, motor vehicle, dog bite, motor-vehicle injury
Related practice areas
Related locations
Call (888) 528-8595 — confidential, free, no fee unless we recover
No fee unless we win. Consultations are confidential.
Call (888) 528-8595
