Grandmother Files Lawsuit Against Universal Studios After Hand Injury
A Sacramento grandmother is filing a lawsuit against Universal Studios after a pole fell on her hand, causing her serious injury, according to the complaint. The grandmother was in line for the Harry Potter attraction at the theme park when the pole fell and allegedly broke her hand. She has since filed a lawsuit against the theme park for injuries she sustained in the accident.
This is an interesting lawsuit because it does not allege that the theme park rides, or attractions injured the woman. If it was an attraction that caused the injury, the woman would be able to file a lawsuit under a theory of strict liability. Theme parks are strictly liable for injuries caused to guests by their attractions. The one caveat is that the attraction must not function according to plan. In other words, those with known conditions who get on a ride and suffer injury are responsible for their injury because they placed themselves in danger and the ride functioned the way it was supposed to.
The situation with the grandmother is different entirely and will be much harder to win. If you slip, trip, or fall at an amusement park, or otherwise suffer an injury related to a dangerous condition on the premises, you are filing a lawsuit under a theory of premises liability, not amusement park liability or strict liability related to products and attractions. Premises liability lawsuits do require you to prove negligence, and they require you to prove negligence in a very specific way.
Understanding premises liability lawsuits
Premises liability lawsuits require the plaintiff to prove negligence. Negligence is proved on a theory of foresight. If the premises owner (or any employee) knows about the dangerous condition, then they are responsible for it under the law. Another allegation that could work is that the premises owner or any employee should have known about the dangerous condition but failed to exercise due care. Lastly, if an employee created the dangerous condition, then the premises owner would be responsible for any injury caused.
In this case, we don’t really know why the pole fell, so we can’t say for certain whether the premises owner failed to exercise due care. Poles aren’t supposed to fall on anyone’s hand, so that is one thing that the plaintiffs have going for them. Chances are good that the pole should not have been placed where it was, and it was placed there by an employee. The employee should have either removed the pole, so it didn’t represent a threat to guests or secured the pole in some other way. The biggest problem for the park is that they failed in that duty of care, and someone was injured as a result of that failure.
Talk to a Tampa Premises Liability Attorney Today
Premises owners and operators have a duty of care to ensure their guests are safe from dangerous conditions. When they fail and someone is injured, they are liable. Call The Matassini Law Firm today to schedule a free consultation and learn more about how our Tampa personal injury attorneys can help.