News   Jul 29, 2024
 188     0 
News   Jul 29, 2024
 93     0 
News   Jul 29, 2024
 486     0 

Can I sue a business for not clearing their sidewalk?

Allow me to take off my moderator cap for a moment if you will.

Unfortunately you saw it and then opted to walk on it.

Perhaps he should have hailed a cab to get to the other side of the property of this negligent occupant/owner? Where was the signed waiver or even "walk at your own risk" sign?

That has to be the first time I've replied to Hydrogen in a while (quantity ≠ quality).
 
the whole "volenti nonfit injuria" doesn't apply to walking down what should be a safe (and presumably ice and potential hazard free) street, document everything, hopefully your witness will be happy to go to trial, should you go that route, you also have the right to speak to a lawyer free of charge for I think 1/2 hour, talk to the law society of upper Canada to clairfy that, but he'll be able to steer you in a better direction, and tell if you have a case.
 
First check with Visa/Mastercard.

I assume you bought the thing on a credit card and the majority of Credit Cards do have some type of insurance.
 
the whole "volenti nonfit injuria" doesn't apply to walking down what should be a safe (and presumably ice and potential hazard free) street, document everything, hopefully your witness will be happy to go to trial, should you go that route, you also have the right to speak to a lawyer free of charge for I think 1/2 hour, talk to the law society of upper Canada to clairfy that, but he'll be able to steer you in a better direction, and tell if you have a case.

I've found that service incredibly difficult to get a hold of.

As for the idea someone should avoid an icy sidewalk, I'm not sure. I know that if I have something of value and see a potentially very slippery sidewalk, I just go around it. That said, a sidewalk should be cleared.
 
How foolish of me to try and carefully walk on a sidewalk.

The point was that you saw it then walked on it. If you wish to sue you will quickly find that this will be a major problem in winning your suit - as in you were aware of the ice that you chose to walk on.
 
The point was that you saw it then walked on it. If you wish to sue you will quickly find that this will be a major problem in winning your suit - as in you were aware of the ice that you chose to walk on.

Does that mean that I shouldn't leave my house? Or that I only have a case if I don't take the effort be to aware of my surroundings and instead walk around with my nose pointed up in the air?
 
The point was that you saw it then walked on it. If you wish to sue you will quickly find that this will be a major problem in winning your suit - as in you were aware of the ice that you chose to walk on.

This is true. The 'If you knew you had a valuable computer and knew there was slippery ice ahead why did you walk on it?' question is going to be a tough one to overcome.
 
Allow me to take off my moderator cap for a moment if you will.

Perhaps he should have hailed a cab to get to the other side of the property of this negligent occupant/owner? Where was the signed waiver or even "walk at your own risk" sign?

That has to be the first time I've replied to Hydrogen in a while (quantity ≠ quality).


No, you are still a moderator, so you can't opt out of the supposed role of moderating you have taken on in order to pass on your snide comments. If you don't want to be a moderator, then relinquish the position entirely. If you really want to throw your weight around, then, as a moderator, go ahead and ban me. That way you won't have to put up with my post count (quantity), or what you deem to be the low quality of my posts.

SeanTrans, I don't think all your posts are shining hallmarks of high intelligence, but until now I have not commented. As I can recall, this is the second time you have made a negative comment concerning my post count. Could this in any way be construed as envy on your part?



Clearly you failed to understand my point. If CDL saw the ice he slipped on (he stated that: "the ice buildup was very noticeable"), and then opted to walk on it while understanding that in doing so it would increase his risk of falling, such knowledge and his subsequent informed action would greatly reduce his chances of winning any suit against a property owner who's business abuts the city-owned sidewalk in question.

When I said unfortunately, I meant unfortunately; knowingly taking an action when the risk is understood tends to put the responsibility of that risk in the hands of the person who took it. Someone just might point that out in court. In no way does this belittle the experience of slipping and falling on ice, or the subsequent loss of an expensive computer in the process.


As to the state of the sidewalk, as I have indicated elsewhere on this forum, if we are to really promote walking and are to take pedestrian movement seriously as a means to getting around, then the city should be responsible for the proper clearing and maintenance of sidewalks in the winter.
 
Does that mean that I shouldn't leave my house? Or that I only have a case if I don't take the effort be to aware of my surroundings and instead walk around with my nose pointed up in the air?

Hey, try and go to court. I'm certainly not stopping you. Once there, state that you saw ice on the sidewalk (risk), and then opted to walk on it (informed), and are now suing for the cost of a broken computer on the basis of that action.
 
Hey, try and go to court. I'm certainly not stopping you. Once there, state that you saw ice on the sidewalk (risk), and then opted to walk on it (informed), and are now suing for the cost of a broken computer on the basis of that action.

But wouldn't it be seen that I displayed due diligence? I was aware of my surroundings and did my best to take care.
 
But you took care by walking on the very thing you are basing your claim on: the poor state of the sidewalk.

And understand this: I'm not putting you down. I think the state of many sidewalks this winter is poor - and your experience is just one more piece of evidence to underscore this point. But when you go to court and say that you saw, and then walked on, an ice-covered sidewalk, you may not get the restitution you seek because you admitted to being aware of the danger of an ice-covered sidewalk.

The property owner you (may) wish to sue might not have been aware of the state of the sidewalk. They might very well argue that they can't be held responsible for what you knew and what they did not know. That would put you in a bind.
 

Back
Top