Case Results

Over twenty years, attorney Howard Alan Kitay has successfully handled thousands of premises liability cases. A few examples:

1. Falling Box in Store. $1,010,000.00
When you enter a store as a customer, you expect the store to take reasonable precautions for your safety. When such precautions are not taken, and you are injured as a result, the store is responsible for the full extent of your injuries. That was the expectation of a 41 year-old man who entered a tool store in El Cajon seeking hardware supplies. While waiting at the counter to pay for his purchase, he was distracted by an employee on a ladder. The employee was removing a heavy box from a high shelf, and appeared to be losing his balance. Many people might have looked the other way, but this gentleman, seeing the employee in danger of falling, rushed over and steadied the ladder. As a result of this swift, selfless action, the employee did not fall. Unfortunately, the employee dropped the heavy box on the customer's head and neck. The customer, whose intention was to prevent injury to the store employee, was himself seriously injured.

The insurance company for the tool store denied the claim. They argued that the customer volunteered to help the employee, and had therefore assumed the risk of being injured as a result. As shocking as this may seem, it is customary for insurance companies deny responsibility in premises liability cases. For this reason, an experienced, tough premises liability attorney is necessary to fight the insurance companies.

Howard Alan Kitay filed a lawsuit on behalf of the customer. Mr. Kitay deposed every person in the store at the time of the incident. It became obvious the customer was the only person close enough to help the employee, and the customer had actually saved the employee from falling off the ladder. Mr. Kitay argued that the customer was a hero, and the insurance company's denial of the claim was simply wrong. By this point, it was clear the customer's injuries were serious. He had sustained a neck injury and a bruise to his brain. He was at risk for seizures for a period of time after the incident.

Finally, the insurance company offered $500,000.00 to settle the claim. They insisted this was their one and only offer, and, if not accepted, they expected to prevail at trial. The $500,000.00 offer was rejected, and the case proceeded to trial.

Shortly before trial, the case settled for $1,010,000.00. Mr. Kitay's client eventually made an excellent recovery and was able to return to full activity.

2. Slip and Fall on Wet Grass $100,000.00
Many premises liability cases occur at the home of a friend. In this case, a 48 year-old woman slipped and fell on a steep hill with wet grass while visiting a friend's house.

The plaintiff was invited into her friend's backyard, which required walking down a steep hill with a six-inch-wide "well-worn path" over wet grass. While walking down the path, the plaintiff slipped and fell, fracturing her right ankle.

Plaintiff was taken to the emergency room, where she was treated for her fractured ankle. Later, surgery was required, and she endured a round of physical therapy to strengthen her ankle. Her medical bills totaled approximately $18.000.00.

A claim was filed with the the homeowner's insurance company. The claim was promptly denied. The insurance company said the incident was plaintiff's fault because the hill was not dangerous.
A lawsuit was filed, and Mr. Kitay began preparation for trial. An engineering expert was hired who inspected the "well-worn path" and determined it violated the Building Code. Unflustered, the insurance company hired its own engineer to say the hill was not dangerous.

Mr. Kitay then deposed the homeowner, who admitted warning the plaintiff to "be careful" on the hill because she knew the hill was dangerous. Under premises liability law, knowledge of a dangerous condition coupled with inadequate measures to make the condition safe, will result in liability of the homeowner for injuries that result. Prior to trial, the insurance company reversed itself and settled the case for the $100,000.00 policy limit.

3. Falling Light Fixture in Restaurant $45,000.00
When you go to a restaurant for dinner, you assume the dining room is safe from falling objects.
If an object falls and strikes you, the restaurant is responsible. At least, that's what a Chula Vista man thought. He was struck by a falling light fixture while dining in a local El Torito Restaurant.
The falling fixture struck the plaintiff's shoulder. He was transported by ambulance to the local emergency room where he was diagnosed with a shoulder injury. Later, he underwent physical therapy. His medical bills totaled $8300.00.

Remarkably, El Torito insisted the incident was not their fault, and refused to settle the case!
Howard Alan Kitay filed a lawsuit against El Torito. The case went to trial. Trial lasted four days, with El Torito arguing the falling fixture was not their fault as they did not know the fixture was loose. The jury rejected this defense, and concluded the fixture came loose as a result of loud disco music. The jury said El Torito should periodically check to make sure the light fixtures are secure. Because they did not, El Torito was negligent. The jury ordered El Torito to pay plaintiff $45,000.00.

4. 75 Year Old Woman Trips Over Unmarked Speed-bump $125,000.00
A 75 year-old San Diego woman was visiting her grandson at his apartment. While walking across the parking lot, she tripped and fell over an unmarked speed-bump. She was taken by ambulance to the emergency room, where she was diagnosed with a left wrist fracture. After surgery to repair her left wrist, she underwent physical therapy. Her medical bills totaled $30,000.00.

Where a dangerous condition exists on property, and the property owner is aware of the danger but fails to make the condition safe or provide adequate warning, persons injured as a result may bring a claim based on negligence. A claim was filed with the insurance company for the apartment building, on the theory that the unmarked speed-bump presented a hazard. The insurance company denied the claim, saying the accident was plaintiff's fault, that plaintiff's vision was bad and she should have been looking where she was going.

A lawsuit was filed, and attorney Howard Kitay deposed the managers of the apartment complex. Mr. Kitay learned that the owner of the apartment building had re-paved the parking lot three months earlier, but had failed to repaint the speed-bumps. The failure to repaint the speed-bump was an oversight. Arguing that this oversight was negligence, Kitay asserted that the apartment management company was responsible for plaintiff's injury. Mr. Kitay also obtained records from plaintiff's optometrist to establish that plaintiff's vision was fine at the time of the incident, and did not contribute to or cause her fall.

Shortly before trial, the insurance company settled plaintiff's claim for $125,000.00.

5. Trip and Fall Off Entry-Way Landing $100,000.00
When you visit a friend's house, you expect your friend to warn you of any dangers that might injure you. Where failure to warn results in injury, the homeowner may be held accountable for that injury.
A 68 year-old San Diego grandmother fell off an entry-way landing while visiting a family friend's house for the first time. She was led into the home through the garage, and came to a landing with one step down leading into the living room. In the dimly-lit entryway, the step down was not clearly visible. Plaintiff fell off the ledge onto the hardwood floor, fracturing her left wrist and pelvis. She was rushed to the emergency room by ambulance. After being discharged from the emergency department, plaintiff had to reside in a nursing facility for five weeks.

A claim was filed with the homeowner's insurance company, alleging the step presented a dangerous condition and that plaintiff was not warned. The insurance company promptly denied the claim, saying the fall was plaintiff's fault for not paying attention, and that no one else had ever fallen off the step. A lawsuit was filed.

Mr. Kitay prepared for trial. First, he retained an engineering expert who inspected the entry-way landing and reported the condition of the premises on the date of the incident violated several California Building Code and Architectural Graphic Standards designed to promote and enforce safety. Second, attorney Kitay deposed several of the occupants of the home, who confirmed they routinely cautioned visitors to "watch out for the step." The homeowners admitted they routinely gave this warning because they knew the step presented a danger to visitors who were not familiar with it. In this case, plaintiff was not given the warning, which resulted in her falling off the step.

Despite the engineering report, the insurance company continued to deny the claim, hiring their own expert to say the lighting was adequate and plaintiff should have seen the step. Finally, on the eve of trial, the insurance company settled plaintiff's claim for $100,000.00.