Our attorneys have a wealth of experience and an excellent rate of success in defending premises liability claims.
Lee Smart has dealt with every type of suit that might arise from premises liability, including trip-and-fall claims, false imprisonment, assault, battery, and liability arising from security operations. Our clients have included apartment complexes, condominiums, large commercial shopping centers, shopping malls, mini markets, and other small businesses. We not only defend clients against claims but also provide seminars to their employees to prevent future claims from arising.
Ingersoll v. Tacoma Mall – Defense of mall operator arising out of premises liability claims. Re-established the notice requirement for premises claims in the State of Washington. [123 Wn.2d 649 (1994)] (JW)
Wabude v. Brown – Defense of a convenience store owner resulting from a slip and fall on a wet floor. Plaintiff claimed $100,000 in damages. Defense verdict. (GPT)
Zink v. Foodmaker – Defense of fast food restaurant after plaintiff tripped and fell, shattering her ankle, resulting in reconstructive surgery and a future ankle fusion. Defense verdict. (GPT)
Sorenson v. Keith Uddenberg, Inc. – 65 Wn. App. 474, 828 P.2d 650 (1992) (premises liability) (JPD)
Norris v. Kenning: Premises liability claim in which plaintiff claimed he was attacked and beaten while on defendant’s premises. The case was tried to a jury and jury found over $1 million in damages, but then reduced client responsibility by 75 percent due to participation of an intentional actor. (PES)