In slip and fall cases, various challenges arise, and I possess extensive knowledge in this area, given my background in defending amusement parks, water-themed parks, and numerous department stores throughout my career. One significant factor is comparative negligence. For instance, if an individual slips and falls on a puddle of water, questions may be raised about why they didn’t notice it. In such cases, having a lawyer is crucial to establish reasons why the person wouldn’t have noticed the hazard and why the responsibility lies with the store or theme park to have identified it.

Drawing from my experience as the decision-maker in determining payouts for these cases, I consistently found that the most compelling arguments came from lawyers who effectively explained why their clients couldn’t have reasonably noticed the hazard leading to the slip and fall. Simultaneously, these lawyers emphasized why the defense clients should have been aware of it.