Here is this week’s issue and response from the accident lawyer from Boca Raton (injury lawyer Delray Beach, accident attorney Boynton Beach, injury attorney Lake Worth, accident lawyer West Palm Beach, injury attorney Lake Worth, accident lawyer Lighthouse Point) will respond to this question.
While common sense would suggest that if the property owner repaired the sidewalk the day after someone fell, then that would be proof of negligence; however, the evidence laws in Florida, pasted below in 90.407, specifically does not allow the repair to be used as proof of negligence. The idea of the evidence rule obviously is to encourage property owners to repair any defects and not to discourage the repair for fear of it being used against them in litigation. This rule does not mean that, in the specific case, there was no negligence it just means that the negligence must be proved another way. In the question presented, there are not a lot of facts to figure out the fault issue. Was the sidewalk cracked? Was the sidewalk uneven? Remember that comparative fault also plays a factor here, so there are other questions that will play into the fault issue, like: Was it day or night when the fall happened? Was the sidewalk lit? Why didn’t the injured person see the defect in the sidewalk? where was the injured person looking?
If you have been in an slip and fall or trip and fall accident and are seeking an attorney, Gary J. Drucker is an accident lawyer who handles cases in Miami-Dade, Broward and Palm Beach Counties. Please call Drucker Law Offices at (561)483-9199 or (954) 755-2120 or (305) 981-1561 – Principal office in Boca Raton as well as satellite offices in Miami, Coral Springs, Boynton Beach, and West Palm Beach.
Every case is unique and should be judged based on the specific facts of the case. The advice in this blog is intended to be general and should not to be construed as specific advice for a case or your case. A minor difference in the facts of the case in a fact pattern such as above could change the result. Also, this blog is, as the web site suggests, based on Florida law and the laws of any other states could vary from Florida.
90.407 Subsequent remedial measures.—Evidence of measures taken after an injury or harm caused by an event, which measures if taken before the event would have made injury or harm less likely to occur, is not admissible to prove negligence, the existence of a product defect, or culpable conduct in connection with the event. This rule does not require the exclusion of evidence of subsequent remedial measures when offered for another purpose, such as proving ownership, control, or the feasibility of precautionary measures, if controverted, or impeachment.
