San Jose Slip and Fall Attorney

Attorney Michael Rehm — (800) 978-0754

Attorney Michael Rehm represents slip and fall victims throughout San Jose and Santa Clara County. Premises liability claims arising from slip and fall accidents are among the most contested in California personal injury law. Property owners and their insurers routinely dispute notice, deny the hazard existed, and argue the injured person was not paying attention. Understanding the legal framework — and what is actually required to establish a claim — is the starting point for evaluating whether a case has merit.

The Legal Standard — Premises Liability and the Duty of Care

Civil Code § 1714(a) imposes a duty of ordinary care on every person in the management of their property. In a slip and fall case, this means that a property owner — whether a commercial business, a private landlord, or a public entity — must exercise reasonable care to maintain the premises in a safe condition and to warn of hazards that are not reasonably obvious.

California applies a single standard of reasonable care to all lawful entrants on property, regardless of whether they are invitees or licensees. The relevant factors a court considers in assessing the owner's duty include the foreseeability of the harm, the burden on the owner to eliminate the hazard, the owner's ability to prevent it, and the policy consequences of imposing liability. See Rowland v. Christian (1968) 69 Cal.2d 108.

Notice — The Central Issue in Most Cases

To hold a property owner liable for a slip and fall, the injured person must establish that the owner had actual or constructive notice of the hazard in time to correct it. Actual notice means the owner knew about the specific condition. Constructive notice means the condition existed for long enough that a reasonably attentive owner should have discovered it through regular inspection and maintenance.

How long a hazard existed before the fall is often the decisive factual question. Evidence relevant to notice includes surveillance footage, incident reports, inspection logs, maintenance records, and prior complaints about the same condition. This evidence must be preserved quickly — surveillance footage is routinely overwritten within 30 to 90 days, and businesses often lack incentive to retain records that document their own failures.

Common Slip and Fall Locations in San Jose

Slip and fall accidents in San Jose occur in grocery and retail stores along Eastridge, Westfield Valley Fair, and Oakridge shopping areas; in parking lots and garages serving downtown businesses, SAP Center, and tech campuses; on public sidewalks maintained by the City of San Jose; and in apartment complexes and multi-family housing throughout the city. Each location involves a different potentially responsible party and a different set of applicable legal duties.

Claims Against Government Entities

A slip and fall on a public sidewalk, in a public park, or on other property maintained by the City of San Jose or another public entity is governed by the Government Claims Act. Government Code § 835 imposes liability on a public entity for injury caused by a dangerous condition of public property if the entity had actual or constructive notice of the condition in time to protect against it. Government Code § 911.2 requires that a claim be filed with the public entity within six months of the incident. Missing this deadline can potentially bar a lawsuit against a government defendant. Tolling doctrines may apply — contact Attorney Michael Rehm to assess the specific timeline in your case.

Comparative Fault

The defense will argue that the injured person was not paying attention, was wearing improper footwear, or should have seen and avoided the hazard. Under California's pure comparative fault system established in Li v. Yellow Cab Co. (1975) 13 Cal.3d 804, any comparative fault reduces recovery proportionally — it does not eliminate the claim. A plaintiff found 25% at fault recovers 75% of proven damages.

Damages

Slip and fall injuries range from soft tissue injuries and fractures to hip replacements, spinal damage, and traumatic brain injury — particularly in falls by older adults. Civil Code § 3333 provides that damages include all detriment proximately caused by the defendant's negligence, whether anticipated or not. Civil Code § 3283 allows recovery for future losses reasonably certain to occur. Recoverable damages include past and future medical expenses, lost earnings, pain and suffering, emotional distress, and loss of enjoyment of life.

Filing Deadline — Statute of Limitations

Code of Civil Procedure § 335.1 sets a two-year statute of limitations for personal injury claims. Missing this deadline can potentially bar a lawsuit. Tolling doctrines may apply depending on the facts — contact Attorney Michael Rehm to assess the specific timeline in your case.

Santa Clara County Superior Court

Slip and fall cases filed in San Jose are heard at the Santa Clara County Superior Court, 191 N. First Street, San Jose, CA 95113. All limited and unlimited civil cases must be filed at the Downtown Superior Court under Local Civil Rule 1(C). E-filing is mandatory for represented parties. Cases estimated to take more than one day at trial require a Mandatory Settlement Conference before the trial assignment hearing, with the MSC Statement due no later than five court days before the conference.

Attorney Michael Rehm handles slip and fall cases throughout San Jose and Santa Clara County on a contingency fee basis. No fee without a recovery. Call (800) 978-0754 for a free consultation.

The information on this page is general legal information, not legal advice, and does not create an attorney-client relationship. Every case turns on its own facts. The law can change — statutes are amended, cases are decided, and regulations are revised; nothing on this page should be relied upon as a statement of current law without verification. Deadlines and legal bars discussed on this page are general guides — whether a particular deadline applies, has run, or is subject to tolling, and whether a particular doctrine bars or limits recovery in your case, requires individual analysis. Contact Attorney Michael Rehm to discuss the specific facts of your situation.