Every day innocent victims are injured or killed in Nevada auto accidents. Our attorneys can help you to get justice and compensation.
Auto Accidents
Every day innocent victims are injured or killed in Nevada auto accidents. Our attorneys can help you to get justice and compensation.
Premises Liability
Nevada law requires property owners to maintain safe conditions. When they fail to do so, and people get injured, our lawyers are here to help.
Please note: Our firm only handles criminal and DUI cases, and only in California. We do not handle any of the following cases:
And we do not handle any cases outside of California.
Call Us NowPosted on
Nevada property owners may assert the “open and obvious defense” when someone gets injured on their property from a hazardous condition that was so plain to see that any reasonable person would have taken notice and avoided it.
In most premises liability cases, property owners are not required to fix or warn about open and obvious hazards precisely because any “reasonable person” would steer clear of them.
Therefore if you bring a negligence lawsuit against a property owner for injuries sustained by open and obvious hazards on their premises, the property owner would argue that all negligence lies with you because:
Ultimately, it is up for the court to decide whether a property condition qualifies and open and obvious.
A pond on someone’s private property is an open and obvious hazard: It is so big that any reasonable person would see it and avoid it; therefore, the property owner does not need to post signs to warn others about it.
If you stand by the edge of the pond for a selfie and then fall in, you probably would not have a winnable personal injury case against the property owner: Since the pond was open and obvious, you should have known that standing near the edge would be risky.
Other examples of potential hazards that are open and obvious include:
I see slip-and-fall injuries from walkways, escalators, and staircases all the time, but property owners usually have no duty to warn people about them as long as they are in working order. This is because any reasonable person would notice something as open and obvious as a walkway, escalator, and staircase and then try to be careful using them.
Example: You are running through a hotel after drinking three beers when you suddenly come upon an escalator, lose your footing, and fall down. If you sue the hotel, they would argue that the escalator was an open and obvious hazard that any reasonable person would have noticed. Instead, they would argue you were at fault for running and being intoxicated.
In contrast, a spilled glass of water on a hotel lobby floor is usually not an open and obvious hazard since water is clear, and you might reasonably miss it. Therefore, the hotel would probably have a duty to clear the spill as soon as possible and to put up a “Warning: Wet Floor” sign in the meantime.
Not all obvious hazards are the same, and some have dangerous conditions that are hidden. In these cases, property owners may have a duty to fix or warn against them. Examples include:
It is not foreseeable to a reasonable person that walkways would be bumpy, or that escalators would be slippery, or that staircases would be uneven; therefore, property owners in these situations probably would not be able to claim the open and obvious defense if you injure yourself on them.
Instead, I would argue that these property owner would have the duty either to:
Yes. Nevada’s modified comparative negligence laws permit you to recover money damages for any accident you were no more than 50% at fault for. So even if an open and obvious hazard injured you, we could still win a lawsuit against the property owner as long as the court finds you no more than half to blame.
Example: Your neighbor is doing construction on their driveway, which has a large hole in the ground. You are texting and walking down the driveway when you fall into the hole, sustaining $10,000 in damages.
You sue your neighbor for negligence, and your neighbor defends themself by arguing the hole was open and obvious. Ultimately, the court finds that you each was 50% to blame: You for texting and walking, and the neighbor for not cordoning off the hole. Therefore, you could receive 50% of your damages ($5,000, which is half of $10,000).
Whether a condition is open and obvious is often subjective. Evidence I rely on to prove that hazards are hidden include:
For more in-depth information on the “open and obvious” defense, refer to these scholarly articles:
A former Los Angeles prosecutor, attorney Neil Shouse graduated with honors from UC Berkeley and Harvard Law School (and completed additional graduate studies at MIT). He has been featured on CNN, Good Morning America, Dr Phil, The Today Show and Court TV. Mr Shouse has been recognized by the National Trial Lawyers as one of the Top 100 Criminal and Top 100 Civil Attorneys.