Proving Hazardous Conditions in Colorado Slip-and-Fall Cases

Slip-and-fall cases are won on evidence. Colorado’s Premises Liability Act focuses on what the landowner knew—or should have known—about a dangerous condition and what they did about it. We move fast to document the hazard, secure surveillance, and build a timeline that proves notice and negligence.

What “Notice” Means in Colorado

To hold a landowner accountable, we must show they knew or should have known about the hazard. We use multiple sources to establish both actual and constructive notice.

• Actual notice: Employees or managers knew about the ice, spill, broken tile, or uneven surface and failed to fix or warn.
• Constructive notice: The condition existed long enough, recurred often, or was predictable enough that reasonable inspections would have found it.
• Recurring hazards: Refreezing at a sloped entry, a leaky cooler, or chronic drainage issues create patterns owners must address.
• Status matters: Invitees (shoppers, tenants’ guests, delivery drivers) are owed reasonable care, including regular inspections and treatment.

Building the Timeline: From Hazard to Fall

A clear timeline often decides liability. We compare what the owner should have done to what actually happened.

• Forecasts and weather records: Show when ice should have been anticipated and when refreeze likely occurred.
• Inspection frequency: Policies versus practice—were reasonable inspections done given traffic and conditions?
• Treatment timing: When shoveling, salting, drying, or repair actually occurred, and whether it was adequate.
• Prior complaints: Incident histories and employee knowledge reveal longstanding hazards

Key Evidence to Preserve Early

Because conditions change quickly, early preservation is critical. If you can, do the basics; then call us so we can send preservation demands and start the investigation.

• Photos and video: Time-stamped images of the hazard, lighting, footprints, untreated areas, and missing warnings help prove duration and notice.
• Surveillance footage: We demand preservation from stores, apartments, parking facilities, and nearby cameras before footage is overwritten.
• Incident reports: Get a copy or note who completed it. These forms often capture admissions about prior knowledge or missed treatment.
• Maintenance logs and policies: Inspection sheets, cleaning schedules, snow/ice plans, and vendor contracts show what should have happened.
• Witnesses and employees: Names and statements from people who saw the hazard, complained earlier, or lack of treatment.
• Footwear and clothing: Preserve shoes and clothing to rebut blame and document contamination (e.g., salt residue, wetness patterns).

Defeating Common Defense Arguments

Insurers rely on familiar defenses. We prepare the proof to counter each one.

• “Storm in progress”: High-traffic areas still require reasonable treatment and warnings during storms; after storms, prompt remediation is expected.
• “We salted”: Timing, coverage, and adequacy matter. Partial or late treatment can still be negligent.
• “Open and obvious”: Visibility doesn’t excuse a failure to fix or warn when the risk is unreasonable given traffic and conditions.
• “Wrong shoes”: We document traction, lighting, surface conditions, and industry standards to show owner negligence—not footwear—caused the fall.

How Klibaner Law Firm Proves Hazardous Conditions

We limit caseload to move fast and build strong, document-heavy cases. Our approach is thorough and proactive.

• Rapid response: Preservation letters within days, scene inspections, and early expert engagement when needed.
• Data-driven proof: Certified weather reports, radar, temperature curves, and refreeze analysis.
• Document subpoenas: Policies, logs, vendor contracts, GPS/plow records, and prior incident histories.
• Expert support: Safety, human factors, and engineering experts when measurements or testing strengthen liability.