Your browser (Internet Explorer 7 or lower) is out of date. It has known security flaws and may not display all features of this and other websites. Learn how to update your browser.

X

Delayed Massachusetts Slip and Fall Claim

In the Boston suburb of Salem, Massachusetts, a jury recently decided that a plaintiff who slipped and fell in a parking lot while going to Dunkin’ Donuts was not entitled to money damages.

Hoey v. Argeros Realty Trust Court/case no.: Salem Superior Court, No. ESCV2007-00259. Boston slip and fall attorney Neil Burns notes that, “It’s always tough to speculate regarding jury’s decisions, but the plaintiff in that case did not file her claim until some four years after she fell. You always want to talk to an attorney soon after suffering and injury from an accident. Waiting four years could not have helped.”
 
In that case, the plaintiff alleged that as she was walking across the parking lot to a Dunkin’ Donuts in the defendant’s shopping plaza, she slipped and fell at the corner of the building. There was a mixture of rain and sleet falling at the time, and the plaintiff alleged that there was raised, bumpy and uneven ice hidden beneath a layer of slush. The plaintiff also alleged that there was water run-off from the roof flowing in an uneven and splattering fashion and that the pool of slush accumulated because of a defect in the pavement.
 
As a result of the fall, the plaintiff injured her hip and back and was transported to the hospital by ambulance, where she remained inpatient for one week before being transferred to a rehabilitation facility, where she stayed for an additional week. She subsequently underwent physical therapy. The plaintiff returned to her work as a bank teller six months after the accident. She later began working for another employer and did not undergo any additional medical treatment for injuries sustained in her fall for a period of four years.
 
Then, after losing her job, the plaintiff sought treatment after complaining of neck and shoulder pain. Medical records reference a work-related accident and a motor vehicle accident. After a day of deliberations, the jury returned a verdict for the defendant, having found that it was not negligent in the maintenance of its property.