Taubman Kimelman & Soroka, LLP
Free Consultation
212-227-8140
Foreign Language Services Available: Spanish Korean Creole Croatian 우리는 한국어 서비스가 있습니다
Se Habla Español En Español

New York woman sues over ankle injury on glass slide

A New York woman who broke her foot while riding on a tower slide built onto the side of a 72-story U.S. Bank Tower building in downtown Los Angeles is reportedly suing the managers and operators of the slide, alleging that their negligence caused her injury. The woman was apparently injured last month, eight days after the slide opened.

In her complaint, the woman alleged that the defendants failed to exercise reasonable care in protecting slide participants from injury and in providing adequate warning to users of the risks involved. Specifically, the complaint alleges, the slide was not designed to slow down users enough before reaching the bottom, creating the risk of ankle and leg injuries. 

In their response to the complaint, the owners and managers of the glass slide are reportedly arguing that they didn’t have control of the part of the slide where the woman was injured and that they were not aware of any dangerous condition, nor did they receive notice of any such condition. The companies argue that any unsafe condition that may have existed on the slide at the time of the injury was “minor, trivial, or insignificant” and that the woman assumed the risk of injury by participating.

There are, of course, several legal issues at play in this cases which touch upon premises liability law. First of all, there is the question of whether the managers and operators of the slide had control of the property where the woman was injured. Premises liability may be imposed not only upon the owner or occupant of the premises, of course, but also upon an entity in control of the premises at the time of an accident.

There is also the issue of notice in the case. Liability for a dangerous condition may be imposed when the owner was aware of the dangerous condition, and this may be demonstrated by either actual or constructive notice. In our next post, we’ll continue looking at this point, as well as other issues at play in the case.

Source: uslaw.org, “State of New York Retail Compendium of Law," Alweis & Borovina, 2014. 

No Comments

Leave a comment
Comment Information
Email Us For A Response

Now Is The Time To Take Action Contact us for a free consultation.

Bold labels are required.

Contact Information
disclaimer.

The use of the Internet or this form for communication with the firm or any individual member of the firm does not establish an attorney-client relationship. Confidential or time-sensitive information should not be sent through this form.

close

Privacy Policy

30 Vesey Street
6th Floor
New York, NY 10007

Phone: 212-227-8140
Fax: 212-385-0662
Map & Directions