Hurt in a slip-and-fall on someone else's property in Florida? You have to prove the owner knew about the hazard. We build the case the law requires.
Florida slip-and-fall law changed dramatically with the 2010 reform that became Fla. Stat. § 768.0755. The law now requires injured customers to prove the property owner had "actual or constructive knowledge" of the dangerous condition. That standard is genuinely tough; it is no longer enough to show the floor was wet. You have to show the owner knew about the hazard or that it had existed long enough that a reasonable owner would have known. Cases that would have settled easily 15 years ago now require careful evidence building. Ilabaca Law represents Florida customers, residents, and visitors injured on someone else's property.
Under Fla. Stat. § 768.0755(1), a plaintiff in a slip-and-fall case at a "transitory foreign substance in a business establishment" must prove:
In practice, this means we need to prove either how long the spill or hazard was on the floor (through video footage, witness observations, condition of the substance) or that similar hazards were a recurring problem at this location. Both approaches require fast evidence preservation.
Surveillance footage from grocery stores, restaurants, and retail businesses is typically overwritten on a 14 to 30 day cycle. Incident reports get filed and then buried. Witnesses forget what they saw. The cleaning schedule and inspection logs for the day of the incident are critical evidence; they will either show the area was inspected recently (helping the defense) or not (helping the plaintiff). All of this evidence is in the hands of the property owner, and most of it has to be preserved by a written letter within days of the fall.
Slip and fall attorneys who know Florida's tough premises liability standard.
Florida slip-and-fall cases typically turn on four levers:
Photos, witness statements, and incident reports establish that the dangerous condition was actually there.
Surveillance footage showing how long the hazard was present, or evidence the condition recurred regularly. This is the legally decisive piece.
Cleaning schedules, inspection logs, and maintenance records show whether the property owner exercised ordinary care.
HB 837's 50% rule applies. The defense will argue the customer was looking at their phone, not paying attention, etc. We build the file to keep the customer below the 50% threshold.
Report the incident to the property manager or store manager before leaving and ask for a written incident report. Photograph the hazard, the surrounding area, and any signage (or lack of signage) before anyone cleans it up. Get the names and contact information of any witnesses, including other customers. Note the time and any visible spill characteristics (color, footprint marks indicating prior traffic, debris). Get medical care the same day. Avoid recorded statements to the property's insurance carrier without legal review.
The defense will argue the hazard was "open and obvious" (you should have seen it), that the customer was distracted ("she was on her phone"), that the spill had just happened (so the owner could not have known), that the area was inspected recently, and that the customer assumed the risk by walking there at all. We counter with surveillance footage, inspection logs, witness statements, and incident-pattern evidence from prior similar falls at the same location.
2 years from the date of the fall to file a negligence claim, for falls on or after March 24, 2023. Earlier falls follow the prior 4-year rule.
The statute that requires "actual or constructive knowledge" of the hazard. Sets the legal framework for slip-and-fall cases at business establishments.
Modified comparative fault: if you are more than 50% at fault, you recover nothing.
We open the case with a no-obligation review, send a written spoliation letter within days to preserve surveillance footage and incident reports, and put the property's insurance carrier on notice. We document the hazard, identify witnesses, and subpoena cleaning and inspection records. We make a written demand backed by evidence; if the carrier will not engage reasonably, we file suit and take the case through to trial when needed.
Florida's premises liability standard makes slip-and-fall cases harder than most plaintiffs realize, but the cases that meet the standard are genuinely valuable. Your best leverage is getting a lawyer involved before evidence disappears and before you talk to any insurance adjuster.
Start your free case review today. Send us the incident report and any photos and Attorney Ravinet will follow up promptly.
Every slip-and-fall case is different. The best answers come from looking at the surveillance footage, the incident report, and your medical documentation. Contact Ilabaca Law for a free, no-obligation review and clear next steps.
Florida's 2010 reform (Fla. Stat. § 768.0755) requires injured customers to prove the property owner had "actual or constructive knowledge" of the hazard. Before 2010, the rule was easier on plaintiffs. Now you have to show either how long the hazard was there or that similar hazards recurred. Cases that would have settled in a phone call 15 years ago now require careful evidence building. Cases that meet the new standard are still very much winnable; they just take more work.
Surveillance footage is the single most important piece of evidence in most cases because it shows how long the hazard was present. Incident reports filed at the scene matter. Cleaning schedules and inspection logs determine whether the owner met its duty of ordinary care. Witness statements from other customers help. Photos of the hazard before it is cleaned up help. Almost all of this evidence is in the property owner's control, and most of it has to be preserved by a written letter within days of the fall.
Two years from the date of the fall under Fla. Stat. § 95.11 for falls on or after March 24, 2023. Earlier falls have the prior 4-year statute. Despite the statute, evidence preservation is far more time-sensitive: surveillance footage often overwrites within 14-30 days. Call us early.
The "open and obvious" defense is one of the most common in slip-and-fall cases. It is not always a winner for the defense; the law generally requires hazards to be hidden or non-obvious only when the property owner can show the plaintiff actually saw and appreciated the risk. We rebut "open and obvious" with witness statements, lighting analysis, and evidence about typical customer attention patterns in the location.
Maybe partially, but probably not entirely. Florida's comparative fault rule (Fla. Stat. § 768.81, modified by HB 837) reduces your recovery by your percentage of fault, and bars recovery only if you are more than 50% at fault. Looking at your phone or being distracted can be a comparative fault factor, but it does not automatically bar the claim. We build the liability case to keep the customer below the 50% threshold.
Generally yes, though private homeowner cases follow different premises liability rules than business establishments. The legal standards depend on whether you were a "business invitee," a "social guest" (called a "licensee" legally), or a trespasser. The homeowner's insurance is the practical recovery source in most cases. We analyze the specific facts to identify which standard applies.
No, not without legal review. The property's carrier is not on your side; they are looking for facts to deny or minimize the claim. Statements often lock in helpful-to-defense facts about distraction, prior injuries, or what the plaintiff "should have seen." We attend any required statements and protect the file.
Nothing up front. Slip-and-fall cases are handled on a contingency-fee basis, with no attorney's fees unless we recover for you.
…and every county in between. Florida-only practice, statewide reach.
Florida deadlines are short. Get a free case review and a straight answer on what your claim is actually worth.
