Home 10 Best Examples of Premises Liability and What Doesn’t Count

10 Best Examples of Premises Liability and What Doesn’t Count

Reading Time: 11 Minutes

October 22, 2025Elvis Goren

When a 70-year-old woman received $3 million after Dunkin’ Donuts spilled scalding coffee on her at a drive-thru, or when a mother and son won $3.595 million from carbon monoxide poisoning at a Michigan hotel, these weren’t just freak accidents. They were textbook premises liability cases.

But not every injury on someone else’s property qualifies for compensation. Understanding the difference could mean millions of dollars in a legitimate claim, or knowing when you simply don’t have a case.

When Grocery Stores Become Million-Dollar Hazards

Quick Hits:

Costco paid $1.6 million when a puddle sat for 90+ minutes
30 minutes is the magic number for proving constructive notice
Home Depot: $500,000 for a door they ignored for 3 years

While shopping at a Costco, one customer suddenly slipped and fell in the refrigerated aisle, landing hard on their hip as concerned shoppers rushed over to help. The cause was a puddle that had been left unattended for more than 30 minutes—no warning signs and no cleanup crew in sight. The oversight ultimately led to a $175,000 settlement in California.

In New York, a woman slipped on an unmarked puddle that had been present for more than 90 minutes. The jury found Costco 87% at fault and awarded her $1.6 million. The difference between these cases? Time and severity of injury. Courts recognize that the longer a hazard exists, the more inexcusable it becomes for stores not to discover and remedy it.

Home Depot learned this lesson the hard way when a steel door fell on 12-year-old Will Baker, causing permanent brain injury. The $500,000 verdict reflected three years of negligent storage practices. Maryland takes an even harder line—their pure contributory negligence rule means even 1% fault bars any recovery, while California simply reduces damages proportionally.

The $3 Million Coffee Spill That Wasn’t About Temperature

Quick Hits:

Dunkin’ paid $3 million for improper lid placement, not hot coffee
Victim needed skin grafts and had to relearn to walk
Respondeat superior makes employers liable for employee mistakes

Forget everything you think you know about hot coffee lawsuits. When a 70-year-old Georgia woman received $3 million from Dunkin’ Donuts, it wasn’t because the coffee was too hot—it was because an employee handed it through the drive-thru window with an unsecured lid.

The results were bad: second and third-degree burns requiring extensive skin grafts, months in a burn unit, and having to relearn how to walk. Medical expenses alone exceeded $200,000. The legal doctrine of respondeat superior made Dunkin’ liable for its employee’s negligence within the scope of employment. While the National Institutes of Health (NIH) recommends 136°F as optimal drinking temperature, this case turned entirely on proper handling procedures, not beverage temperature.

Construction Sites Crane Collapse

Quick Hits:

NYC crane collapse: $96 million total verdict
$48 million in punitive damages for using defective parts despite warnings
Bronx crane accident: $25 million settlement

The numbers are staggering: $96 million total when a crane collapsed on Manhattan’s E. 91st Street in 2008, killing crane operator Donald Leo and construction worker Ramadan Kurtaj. The jury awarded $47.8 million in compensatory damages plus another $48 million in punitive damages against crane owner James Lomma.

What pushed this into punitive damage territory? Evidence revealed Lomma had received an email warning about faulty welding in Chinese-manufactured parts, and used them anyway. That conscious disregard for safety transformed a tragedy into reckless endangerment.

The Dark Side of Parking Garages

Quick Hits:

62,764 violent crimes in parking garages/lots in 2022
Random attacks don’t create liability even with security gaps
Must prove prior similar incidents for successful claim

Despite FBI data showing 62,000+ violent crimes occurred in U.S. parking garages and lots in 2022, property owners aren’t automatically liable when attacks happen. The Teglas v. City of Brantford case from Ontario illustrates why: despite having no cameras in the stairwell where an assault occurred, the court dismissed the case because the attack was random and unforeseeable.

The facility had 24/7 security staff, regular patrols, and 24 cameras elsewhere. Even though the city breached its duty by not having complete camera coverage, this breach didn’t cause the plaintiff’s damages. For a successful negligent security claim, victims must prove that prior similar incidents created a duty for enhanced security and that better security would have prevented this specific crime.

Playground Injuries: When Common Areas Become Legal Battlegrounds

Quick Hits:

California playground case: $1.535 million
Property owners, manufacturers, and contractors all potentially liable
Regular inspections and prompt repairs legally required

Every parent’s nightmare became reality in Durham when that Home Depot door fell on 12-year-old Will Baker. The $500,000 verdict—far less than the $20 million requested—still recognized three years of negligent storage. In California, a minor’s playground injury led to a $1.535 million settlement, demonstrating how seriously courts take landlord responsibilities for common areas.

Property owners can’t just install equipment and forget it. The law requires regular maintenance checks, prompt repairs, warning signs for damaged equipment, and proper installation. Multiple parties often share liability—the property owner, equipment manufacturer, installation contractor, and maintenance company might all contribute to a settlement.

The Overhead Bin Danger Zone

Quick Hits:

4,500 passengers injured annually from falling luggage
International flights = strict liability under Montreal Convention
Woman lost $78,000/year job after overhead bin injury

The friendly skies aren’t always so friendly when luggage comes crashing down. A woman in her 60s received a high six-figure settlement after a suitcase fell from an overhead bin during a flight attendant’s rearrangement at JFK. The falling luggage caused cognitive difficulties that cost her a $78,000-per-year medical laboratory job.

Airlines face different liability standards depending on the route. International flights fall under the Montreal Convention, creating strict liability for “accidents”—unusual or unexpected external events. Domestic flights require proving negligence. With approximately 4,500 passengers injured annually from falling baggage, this is far from a rare occurrence.

The Silent Killer in Hotel Rooms

Quick Hits:

Baltimore hotel: $34 million for 20 restaurant workers
Best Western: $12 million after child’s death (another couple died 2 months earlier)
Only 14 states require hotel carbon monoxide detectors

Carbon monoxide doesn’t discriminate, and neither do the verdicts. When 20 Ruth’s Chris Steakhouse workers suffered carbon monoxide poisoning at Baltimore’s Pier 5 Hotel in 2010, the jury awarded $34 million total, with individual damages ranging from $11,000 to over $3.75 million depending on severity.

The truly tragic cases involve deaths. In Boone, North Carolina, an 11-year-old boy died from carbon monoxide poisoning caused by a poorly vented pool heater at a Best Western. His parents received $12 million. The horrifying detail? Another couple had died in the same room just two months earlier. Between 400 and 500 people die annually from unintentional carbon monoxide exposure, with 40,000 suffering serious injuries, yet only 14 states require hotels to install carbon monoxide detectors.

Big Box Store Hazards Hiding in Plain Sight

Quick Hits:

Items stacked 15+ feet high without restraints
Stores claim safety devices “aren’t practical”
Multiple parties often share liability

The steel door at Home Depot that permanently injured 12-year-old Will Baker had been improperly stored for over three years. The $500,000 verdict reflected the jury’s finding of negligence, though they felt the injuries didn’t warrant the $20 million requested. Big box stores routinely stack merchandise 15 feet or higher without physical restraints, claiming safety devices “aren’t practical.”

Courts aren’t buying it. Successful claims typically prove inadequate employee training, lack of periodic safety checks, failure to anticipate customer interaction with merchandise, and no physical restraints despite height hazards. Multiple parties often share liability—the store, shelf manufacturers, and installation contractors might all contribute.

The Airbnb Pool Problem

Quick Hits:

Teen’s death: $1.3 million settlement (policy limits)
Pool had hooks for $100 safety line—none installed
Commercial use triggers heightened safety standards

When 16-year-old Cameron Brown drowned at an Orange Park Airbnb in 2023, investigators discovered two hidden slopes in the pool that caused him to lose footing. The pool had eyelet hooks for a safety line, which would have cost about $100, but none were installed. His family received a $1.3 million settlement. When pools are used commercially for short-term rentals, they’re subject to heightened safety standards, not just residential pool codes. Airbnb’s defense—that it’s “merely an online platform”—has had mixed success. The WHO reports drowning as the third leading cause of death for children ages 5 to 14, with over 300,000 deaths annually.

When It’s NOT Premises Liability: The Untied Shoelace Problem

Quick Hits:

You created the hazard, not the property owner
Maryland: 1% fault = zero recovery
California: damages reduced by your fault percentage

If you trip over your own untied shoelace in a store, you generally can’t sue, even if you’re injured. You created the hazard, not the property owner. A New Jersey case from 2020 illustrates the narrow exception: the court allowed a case to proceed where the plaintiff proved their shoe went under a shelf fixture, with witnesses confirming the shelf leg caused the trip, not just the shoelace.

State laws vary wildly on contributory negligence. Maryland, Virginia, North Carolina, Alabama, and D.C. apply pure contributory negligence—even 1% fault bars all recovery. California and Wisconsin use comparative negligence, reducing damages by your fault percentage.

Ignoring the “DANGER” Sign: When Obvious Hazards Defeat Claims

Quick Hits:

Open and obvious doctrine traditionally bars claims
Michigan 2023: Changed from complete defense to just one factor
Duty to maintain safely exists even without duty to warn

That bright yellow “Wet Floor” sign might do more than prevent falls—it could prevent lawsuits. Under the “open and obvious” doctrine, property owners generally aren’t liable when visitors ignore clear warnings. But the law is evolving. Michigan made waves in 2023 when its Supreme Court overturned precedent, ruling that open and obvious hazards no longer completely eliminate a property owner’s duty.

In 2019, a Florida trucker acknowledged seeing a large oil spill and cones before falling. Traditional doctrine would bar his claim, but the court distinguished between the duty to warn (eliminated by obvious hazard) and the duty to maintain safe premises (still required). The modern trend suggests property owners can’t simply put up a sign and walk away.

Random Violence: When Even Good Security Isn’t Enough

Quick Hits:

Prior similar incidents within 2 years required
Adequate security = no liability, even with gaps
Property crime doesn’t predict violent assault

Property owners aren’t insurers against all crime. Even when attacks occur on their premises, liability requires proving the crime was foreseeable. The Teglas case demonstrates this: despite security gaps, the court found no liability because 24/7 security staff were present, regular patrols occurred, and no prior similar incidents established foreseeability.

For liability to attach, plaintiffs must typically prove prior similar crimes on the property within the previous two years. Random, isolated criminal acts—even tragic ones—generally don’t create premises liability if reasonable security measures were in place.

The Bottom Line: Know Your Rights, Understand the Limits

Premises liability law protects victims of preventable injuries while recognizing that property owners can’t prevent every possible harm. The difference between a million-dollar settlement and a dismissed case often comes down to foreseeability, notice, and whether the property owner breached their duty of care.

Document everything, seek immediate medical attention, and understand that not every injury—no matter how serious—automatically creates liability. The law requires property owners to be reasonable, not perfect. But when they fail that basic standard and injuries result, the consequences can reach into the millions.

If you believe you were injured because of someone else’s negligence, don’t wait—speak to an experienced attorney. DK Law is here to help you understand your rights and fight for the compensation you deserve. Contact us today for a free consultation.

About the Author

Elvis Goren

Elvis Goren is the Organic Growth Manager at DK Law, bringing over a decade of content and SEO expertise from Silicon Valley startups to the legal industry. He champions a human-first approach to legal content, crafting fun and engaging resources that make complex injury law topics resonate with everyday readers while driving meaningful organic growth.