337-201-9222
Call Us Now
Email Us Now
An injury can happen in an instant. A puddle of water on a grocery store floor, a broken handrail on a staircase, or a poorly lit parking lot in Lafayette can all lead to a fall and serious, life-altering harm. When you are injured on someone else’s property, a flood of questions follows. Who pays for these medical bills? Can the property owner be held responsible?
Many people assume that if you are hurt on someone else’s property, the owner is automatically liable. In Louisiana, this is not necessarily true. Our state’s laws set a high bar for proving a premises liability claim. Just because an accident happened does not mean the owner was legally at fault.
So, how does a Louisiana court decide when a property owner is responsible for an injury? The answer lies in proving what the owner knew and what they did, or failed to do, about it.
The General Rule: A Duty of Reasonable Care
Under Louisiana law, property owners are not the absolute insurers of every person who steps onto their land. They do, however, have a legal duty to provide a “reasonably safe” environment. The owner’s duty is defined in several places, including Louisiana Civil Code Art. 2317.1 (regarding “ruin, vice, or defect”) and Art. 2322 (for building-related “ruin”).
Louisiana laws establish the central theme of any premises liability case: knowledge.
To win a claim, you, the injured person, must prove that the property owner knew or, in the exercise of reasonable care, should have known about the defect or hazard that caused your injury. This is a crucial distinction that breaks down into two categories.
Actual vs. Constructive Notice: The “Should Have Known” Test
A court will look for evidence that the owner had one of two types of notice.
- Actual Notice: Actual notice means the owner or their employee literally knew about the hazard. Perhaps they created the hazard (like an employee mopping a floor), a customer reported the hazard, or an employee saw the hazard and ignored it
- Constructive Notice: Constructive notice is the more common, and more complex, legal battleground. It means the condition existed for such a period of time that the property owner should have discovered it if they were being reasonably careful
The “time” element is the key. A spilled drink in a restaurant aisle that has been there for two hours is a hazard the staff probably should have found. A single grape that fell on the floor two seconds before you stepped on it is likely not. A core part of your case is proving the hazard existed long enough for a responsible owner to have found and fixed it.
The “Merchant Liability Statute”: A Specific Hurdle for Slip-and-Falls
When you are injured in a store, restaurant, or other business in Louisiana, your case faces an even more specific set of rules. Louisiana Revised Statute 9:2800.6, often called the “merchant liability statute,” was written to create a high burden of proof for plaintiffs.
If you are injured in a slip-and-fall (or trip-and-fall) at a merchant’s business, you must prove all three of the following things:
- The Condition Presented an Unreasonable Risk of Harm: The hazard must be more than a minor inconvenience. A puddle of oil, a broken freezer door leaking water, or a large, unsecured mat are examples. A tiny scuff mark or a single raindrop might not be considered an “unreasonable risk.”
- The Merchant Created or Had Actual or Constructive Notice: You must prove the store caused the spill, knew about the spill, or the spill was there long enough that they should have known
- The Merchant Failed to Exercise Reasonable Care: Finally, you must prove the merchant did not take reasonable steps to clean or warn about the hazard. The absence of a “wet floor” sign, a lack of regular safety sweeps, or ignoring a known problem can all be used to show a failure of reasonable care
Failing to prove even one of these three elements means the claim will fail in court. This is why premises liability cases are so challenging and require a thorough investigation.
What if I Was Partially at Fault? Louisiana’s Comparative Fault Rule
We often hear clients ask what will happen if they were partially at fault. What if I was looking at my phone when I tripped? What if I was in a hurry? Does that mean I don’t have a case?
Not necessarily. Louisiana functions on a “pure comparative fault” system, outlined in Louisiana Civil Code Art. 2323. This means the court will assign a percentage of fault to i involved.
For example, a court might find that the store was 75% at fault for the wet floor, but that you were 25% at fault for not paying attention. In this case, you could still recover 75% of your damages. Your partial fault reduces your award; it does not eliminate it.
A Critical Update to Louisiana Law (Effective Jan. 1, 2026)
This system of pure comparative fault is about to change. Beginning on January 1, 2026, Louisiana will switch to a modified comparative fault system.
Under this new law, if you are found to be 51% or more at fault for your own accident, you will be barred from recovering any damages. You will get nothing.
This change makes the fight over percentages more critical than ever. It means that having an aggressive legal advocate who can effectively argue that the property owner bears the primary responsibility for the hazard is essential.
We Help Real People in Lafayette Parish
No one enjoys going through a legal dispute. Even if you are the one who was wronged, the hassle of dealing with insurance claims and court filings is overwhelming. At The Law Office of Tony Morrow, we have spent more than 30 years helping real people with real stories right here in Lafayette Parish. We are a personable law firm, and our staff truly understands that people get into accidents and need help.
If you or a loved one has been injured on someone else’s property, do not let fear or apprehension stop you from making a call. An initial consultation can help you understand your situation and a better way forward. Contact The Law Office of Tony Morrow today at 337-201-9222 to talk about your case.
