Premises Liability Complaint

PREMISES LIABILITY COMPLAINT — FLORIDA

TABLE OF CONTENTS

1. Caption
2. Parties
3. Jurisdiction and Venue
4. Factual Allegations
5. First Count — Negligence (Premises Liability)
6. Second Count — Negligent Maintenance of Property
7. Third Count — Failure to Warn
8. Fourth Count — Negligent Security
9. Damages
10. Jury Demand
11. Prayer for Relief
12. State-Specific Notes
13. Sources and References

1. CAPTION

IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE [ORDINAL] JUDICIAL CIRCUIT

IN AND FOR [COUNTY NAME] COUNTY, FLORIDA

2. PARTIES

1. Plaintiff, [PLAINTIFF FULL NAME] ("Plaintiff"), is a [resident/citizen] of [COUNTY] County, Florida, residing at [ADDRESS].

2. Defendant, [DEFENDANT FULL NAME] ("Defendant"), is [an individual residing in / a Florida corporation / a corporation authorized to do business in / a limited liability company organized under the laws of] [STATE], and at all relevant times was the [owner / lessee / occupier / manager] of the real property located at [PROPERTY ADDRESS], [CITY], [COUNTY] County, Florida [ZIP CODE] (the "Premises").

3. JURISDICTION AND VENUE

4. This is an action for damages in excess of $[50,000 / 30,000] exclusive of interest and costs, which exceeds the jurisdictional amount of the Circuit Court [or County Court, as applicable].

5. Venue is proper in [COUNTY] County pursuant to Fla. Stat. § 47.011 because [the cause of action accrued in this county / Defendant resides in this county].

4. FACTUAL ALLEGATIONS

6. At all relevant times, Defendant [owned / leased / occupied / managed / controlled] the Premises located at [PROPERTY ADDRESS], [CITY], Florida [ZIP CODE].

7. On or about [DATE OF INCIDENT], Plaintiff was [lawfully present on / entering / exiting] the Premises as [an invitee / a licensee] for the purpose of [PURPOSE OF VISIT, e.g., shopping, dining, visiting, conducting business].

8. At the time of the incident, there existed on the Premises a dangerous condition, specifically: [DESCRIBE DANGEROUS CONDITION IN DETAIL].

9. Defendant had [actual / constructive] knowledge of the dangerous condition because:

☐ Defendant created the dangerous condition.

☐ Defendant had actual knowledge of the dangerous condition through [DESCRIBE].

☐ The dangerous condition existed for such a length of time that, in the exercise of ordinary care, Defendant should have known of the condition. (See Fla. Stat. § 768.0755.)

☐ The condition occurred with regularity and was therefore foreseeable.

10. As a direct and proximate result of the dangerous condition, Plaintiff [DESCRIBE INCIDENT] and sustained serious bodily injuries.

5. FIRST COUNT — NEGLIGENCE (PREMISES LIABILITY)

(Against Defendant [DEFENDANT NAME])

11. Plaintiff re-alleges and incorporates by reference paragraphs 1 through 10 above.

12. At the time of the incident, Plaintiff was [an invitee / a licensee] on the Premises. As such, Defendant owed Plaintiff a duty to [maintain the Premises in a reasonably safe condition / warn of hazards known to Defendant that were not known to or readily observable by Plaintiff].

13. Defendant breached this duty by one or more of the following acts or omissions:

☐ Failing to maintain the Premises in a reasonably safe condition;

☐ Failing to conduct reasonable inspections of the Premises;

☐ Failing to correct or repair the dangerous condition;

☐ Failing to warn Plaintiff of the dangerous condition;

☐ [OTHER SPECIFIC ACTS OR OMISSIONS].

14. Defendant's breach was the proximate cause of Plaintiff's injuries and damages.

6. SECOND COUNT — NEGLIGENT MAINTENANCE OF PROPERTY

(Against Defendant [DEFENDANT NAME])

15. Plaintiff re-alleges and incorporates by reference all preceding paragraphs.

16. Defendant had a duty to properly maintain the Premises, including but not limited to [SPECIFY MAINTENANCE DUTIES].

17. Defendant negligently maintained the Premises by [DESCRIBE SPECIFIC MAINTENANCE FAILURES].

18. Defendant's negligent maintenance was a proximate cause of Plaintiff's injuries and damages.

7. THIRD COUNT — FAILURE TO WARN

(Against Defendant [DEFENDANT NAME])

19. Plaintiff re-alleges and incorporates by reference all preceding paragraphs.

20. Defendant knew or, in the exercise of reasonable care, should have known of the dangerous condition on the Premises.

21. Defendant failed to provide adequate warnings to Plaintiff of the dangerous condition, including but not limited to [failure to post warning signs / failure to barricade the hazardous area / failure to use cones or markers].

22. Defendant's failure to warn was a proximate cause of Plaintiff's injuries and damages.

8. FOURTH COUNT — NEGLIGENT SECURITY

(Against Defendant [DEFENDANT NAME])

23. Plaintiff re-alleges and incorporates by reference all preceding paragraphs.

24. Defendant knew or should have known that criminal activity had occurred on or near the Premises, including [DESCRIBE PRIOR CRIMINAL INCIDENTS].

25. Despite this knowledge, Defendant failed to provide reasonable security measures, including but not limited to [adequate lighting / security cameras / security personnel / controlled access / fencing].

26. Defendant's failure to provide adequate security was a proximate cause of Plaintiff's injuries and damages.

9. DAMAGES

27. As a direct and proximate result of Defendant's conduct, Plaintiff has suffered and continues to suffer the following damages:

a. Medical Expenses: Past and future reasonable medical expenses, including hospitalization, surgery, physician visits, physical therapy, prescription medications, and diagnostic testing.

b. Lost Wages and Earning Capacity: Past and future loss of wages, income, and earning capacity.

c. Pain and Suffering: Past and future bodily injury and resulting pain and suffering.

d. Mental Anguish: Past and future mental anguish and emotional distress.

e. Disability: Past and future disability, physical impairment, and inconvenience.

f. Disfigurement: Past and future disfigurement and scarring.

g. Loss of Capacity for Enjoyment of Life: Diminished ability to enjoy life's activities.

h. Aggravation of Pre-Existing Conditions: [IF APPLICABLE — Aggravation or activation of pre-existing conditions.]

i. Loss of Consortium: [IF APPLICABLE — filed as a separate claim by Plaintiff's spouse.]

10. JURY DEMAND

28. Plaintiff hereby demands a trial by jury on all issues so triable.

11. PRAYER FOR RELIEF

WHEREFORE, Plaintiff demands judgment against Defendant for:

1. Compensatory damages in excess of $[JURISDICTIONAL AMOUNT];
2. Prejudgment interest as permitted by law;
3. Costs of this action;
4. Such other and further relief as this Court deems just and proper.

DATED: [DATE]

Respectfully submitted,

[LAW FIRM NAME]

By: ________________________________________
[ATTORNEY NAME], Florida Bar No. [NUMBER]
[ADDRESS LINE 1]
[ADDRESS LINE 2]
[CITY], Florida [ZIP CODE]
Telephone: [PHONE]
Email: [EMAIL]
Attorney for Plaintiff [PLAINTIFF NAME]

12. STATE-SPECIFIC NOTES

Visitor Classification. Florida retains the traditional distinctions among invitees, licensees, and trespassers. The property owner's duty varies depending on the visitor's status.

Modified Comparative Negligence (HB 837). Effective March 24, 2023, Florida shifted from pure comparative negligence to a modified system under Fla. Stat. § 768.81. A plaintiff whose fault exceeds 50% is barred from recovery. If the plaintiff is 50% or less at fault, damages are reduced proportionally.

Transitory Foreign Substances (Fla. Stat. § 768.0755). In slip-and-fall cases involving transitory foreign substances, the plaintiff must prove the business had actual or constructive knowledge of the hazardous condition. Constructive knowledge may be shown through circumstantial evidence that the condition existed for a sufficient time that it should have been discovered, or that it occurred with regularity.

Statute of Limitations. Two (2) years from the date of injury. Fla. Stat. § 95.11(3)(a) (as amended by HB 837, reduced from four years).

Government Property. Claims against government entities are governed by Fla. Stat. § 768.28 (sovereign immunity waiver). Written notice must be provided, and damages are capped at $200,000 per claim / $300,000 per incident (subject to legislative claim bills for excess amounts).

Open and Obvious Doctrine. A property owner may assert that the dangerous condition was open and obvious as a defense, but this does not automatically bar liability; it is considered in the comparative fault analysis.

No Punitive Damages in Standard Premises Liability. Punitive damages are generally not available absent conduct constituting intentional misconduct or gross negligence as defined in Fla. Stat. § 768.72. A court order is required before amending to add punitive damages.

13. SOURCES AND REFERENCES

• Fla. Stat. § 768.0755 — Premises Liability for Transitory Foreign Substances
• Fla. Stat. § 768.81 — Comparative Fault
• Fla. Stat. § 768.28 — Sovereign Immunity Waiver
• Fla. Stat. § 768.72 — Punitive Damages
• Fla. Stat. § 95.11(3)(a) — Statute of Limitations
• HB 837 (2023) — Florida Tort Reform Act
• Fla. R. Civ. P. 1.110 — General Rules of Pleading