Premises Liability Complaint - Minnesota

PREMISES LIABILITY COMPLAINT — MINNESOTA

TABLE OF CONTENTS

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

1. CAPTION

STATE OF MINNESOTA

COUNTY OF [COUNTY NAME]

DISTRICT COURT

[____] JUDICIAL DISTRICT

2. PARTIES

1. Plaintiff [PLAINTIFF FULL NAME] ("Plaintiff") is an individual residing in [CITY], [COUNTY] County, Minnesota.

2. Defendant [DEFENDANT FULL NAME] ("Defendant") is [an individual residing in / a corporation organized under the laws of / a limited liability company formed 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, Minnesota (the "Premises"). Defendant may be served with process at [ADDRESS FOR SERVICE].

3.

3. JURISDICTION AND VENUE

4. This Court has jurisdiction over this matter pursuant to Minn. Stat. § 484.01 and the Minnesota Constitution, Article VI.

5. Venue is proper in [COUNTY] County pursuant to Minn. R. Civ. P. 2 because [the cause of action arose 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], Minnesota [ZIP CODE].

7. On or about [DATE OF INCIDENT], Plaintiff was [lawfully present on / entering / exiting] the Premises for the purpose of [PURPOSE OF VISIT].

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 condition through [DESCRIBE].

☐ The condition existed for a sufficient period of time that Defendant, in the exercise of reasonable care, should have discovered it.

☐ The condition was part of a recurring hazard known to Defendant.

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

5. DUTY OF CARE — REASONABLE CARE UNDER THE CIRCUMSTANCES

11. At the time of the incident, Plaintiff was lawfully on the Premises as [an invitee / a licensee]. Entrant status is one circumstance in the negligence analysis, not the controlling duty category.

12. Defendant owed Plaintiff ordinary reasonable care under the circumstances. Peterson v. Balach, 294 Minn. 161, 199 N.W.2d 639 (1972). For a transient condition, Plaintiff alleges that Defendant [created the condition / actually knew of it / should have discovered it through reasonable care]. Messner v. Red Owl Stores, Inc., 238 Minn. 411, 57 N.W.2d 659 (1953).

6. FIRST CAUSE OF ACTION — NEGLIGENCE (PREMISES LIABILITY)

(Against [DEFENDANT NAME])

13. Plaintiff re-alleges and incorporates by reference paragraphs 1 through 12 above.

14. Defendant owed Plaintiff the reasonable-care duties described above under the circumstances.

15. Defendant breached these duties by [failing to maintain the Premises / failing to inspect / failing to repair / failing to warn Plaintiff].

16. Defendant's breach was a direct and proximate cause of Plaintiff's injuries and damages.

7. SECOND CAUSE OF ACTION — FAILURE TO WARN

(Against [DEFENDANT NAME])

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

18. Defendant knew or should have known of the dangerous condition on the Premises.

19. Defendant failed to provide adequate warning to Plaintiff.

20. Defendant's failure to warn was a proximate cause of Plaintiff's injuries.

8. THIRD CAUSE OF ACTION — NEGLIGENT MAINTENANCE

(Against [DEFENDANT NAME])

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

22. Defendant had a duty to properly maintain the Premises.

23. Defendant negligently failed to perform required maintenance, specifically [DESCRIBE].

24. Defendant's negligent maintenance was a proximate cause of Plaintiff's injuries.

9. DAMAGES

25. As a proximate result of Defendant's negligence, Plaintiff has suffered the following damages:

a. Medical Expenses: Past and future reasonable and necessary medical expenses.

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

c. Physical Pain and Suffering: Past and future physical pain, suffering, and disability.

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

e. Disfigurement: Past and future disfigurement.

f. Loss of Enjoyment of Life: Past and future loss of enjoyment of life.

g. Loss of Consortium: [IF APPLICABLE — Loss of consortium.]

10. JURY DEMAND

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

11. PRAYER FOR RELIEF

WHEREFORE, Plaintiff demands judgment against Defendant as follows:

1. Compensatory damages in an amount to be determined at trial;
2. Pre-judgment and post-judgment interest;
3. Costs and disbursements of this action;
4. Such other and further relief as the Court deems just and equitable.

Respectfully submitted,

[LAW FIRM NAME]

By: ________________________________________
[ATTORNEY NAME], Atty. Reg. No. [NUMBER]
[ADDRESS LINE 1]
[ADDRESS LINE 2]
[CITY], Minnesota [ZIP CODE]
Telephone: [PHONE]
Facsimile: [FAX]
Email: [EMAIL]
Attorney for Plaintiff [PLAINTIFF NAME]

12. VERIFICATION

STATE OF MINNESOTA
COUNTY OF [COUNTY NAME]

I, [PLAINTIFF FULL NAME], being first duly sworn, state that I have read the foregoing Complaint and that the facts stated therein are true and correct to the best of my knowledge and belief.

________________________________________
[PLAINTIFF FULL NAME]

SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN TO BEFORE ME on [DATE].

________________________________________
Notary Public
My Commission Expires: [DATE]

13. STATE-SPECIFIC NOTES

Visitor Classifications. Peterson abolished licensee/invitee status as the controlling duty test. The possessor owes lawful entrants ordinary reasonable care under the circumstances; status remains one relevant circumstance. Peterson v. Balach, 294 Minn. 161, 199 N.W.2d 639 (1972).

Comparative Fault (Person-Specific Comparison). Under Minn. Stat. § 604.01, recovery against a person is barred if plaintiff's fault exceeds that person's fault. If not barred, allowed damages are reduced by plaintiff's percentage of fault.

Six-Year Statute of Limitations. Minn. Stat. § 541.05, subd. 1(5) provides six years for personal injury claims.

No Damages Cap. Minnesota does not cap compensatory damages in standard premises liability cases.

Government Claims. Section 466.05 generally requires municipal notice to the governing body within 180 days after discovery of the alleged loss or injury and specifies its contents, actual-notice rule, and exceptions. Section 466.04 currently limits covered claims to $500,000 per claimant and $1,500,000 per occurrence.

Attractive Nuisance. Minnesota recognizes the attractive nuisance doctrine for child trespassers.

Snow and Ice. Property owners may be liable for failing to maintain walkways and parking areas free of ice and snow accumulation within a reasonable time.

14. SOURCES AND REFERENCES

• Minn. Stat. § 604.01 — Comparative fault
• Minn. Stat. § 541.05 — Six-year statute of limitations
• Minn. Stat. § 466.01 et seq. — Municipal tort liability
• Minn. Stat. § 604A.01 et seq. — Recreational use immunity
• Peterson v. Balach, 294 Minn. 161 (1972)