Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0
mamabear_1018

Slip and Fall

6 posts in this topic

My 10 year old fell and hit his face on a towel disenser, which knocked his tooth loose. The investigation company for the store found the store to be liable. How is it determined how much compensation he is entitled to.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If, in fact, the store assumes liability or is found by a jury to be liable (just because some investigator "found the store to be liable" doesn't mean it actually is or that it will assume liability), you, on behalf of your son, will be entitled to the cost of his medical/dental treatment. You may also be entitled to compensation if you or the child's other parent lost wages as a result of the accident. You might also be entitled to something for "pain and suffering" (given the nature of the injury described, I wouldn't expect much more than a nominal amount for this).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It is extremely rare for any entity to accept liability for a slip and fall accident. So, I would suggest exploiting the situation before they change their mind.

Compensation can be had for medical expenses and mental anguish. They will probably not offer more than a nominal sum for this relatively minor incident.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If, in fact, the store assumes liability or is found by a jury to be liable (just because some investigator "found the store to be liable" doesn't mean it actually is or that it will assume liability), you, on behalf of your son, will be entitled to the cost of his medical/dental treatment. You may also be entitled to compensation if you or the child's other parent lost wages as a result of the accident. You might also be entitled to something for "pain and suffering" (given the nature of the injury described, I wouldn't expect much more than a nominal amount for this).

This may be splitting hairs but it's the child that would be entitled to compensation for the injury (if the store was liable) not the parent. The parent would be acting on behalf of the child in making the claim.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This may be splitting hairs but it's the child that would be entitled to compensation for the injury (if the store was liable) not the parent. The parent would be acting on behalf of the child in making the claim.

It is splitting hairs, and whether your statement is correct depends on the laws of the state where this occurred, which the poster didn't identify.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0