Premises Liability Complaint - Minnesota

PREMISES LIABILITY COMPLAINT — MINNESOTA

At filing: Provide the district court administrator a completed Form CIV117 Civil Cover Sheet under Minn. Gen. R. Prac. 104(b). This non-family personal injury action is outside Rule 111.01's listed exceptions.

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. Defendant was responsible for [inspecting / maintaining / repairing / warning visitors about] the area of the Premises where the incident occurred.

3. JURISDICTION AND VENUE

4. This Court has original jurisdiction over this civil action under Minn. Stat. § 484.01, subd. 1(1).

5. Venue is proper in [COUNTY] County under Minn. Stat. § 542.09 because [the cause of action or part of it arose in this county / one or more Defendants resided in this county when the action began].

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 reasonable care under the circumstances, including reasonable inspection, repair, or warning as warranted by the facts. Foss v. Kincade, 766 N.W.2d 317 (Minn. 2009) (discussing Peterson v. Balach). For a transient condition, Plaintiff alleges that Defendant [created the condition / actually knew of it / should have discovered it through reasonable care].

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. [SELECT ONE: $[AMOUNT] in unliquidated damages / reasonable damages in an amount greater than $50,000];
2. Prejudgment and postjudgment interest to the extent authorized by Minn. Stat. § 549.09;
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]

Acknowledgment under Minn. Stat. § 549.211, subd. 1: Plaintiff acknowledges that sanctions may be imposed under Minn. Stat. § 549.211.

Plaintiff signature: [________________________________] Date: [__/__/____]

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 reasonable care under the circumstances; status remains one relevant circumstance. Foss v. Kincade, 766 N.W.2d 317 (Minn. 2009) (quoting and applying Peterson).

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.

Ordinary Negligence Limitation. Minn. Stat. § 541.05, subd. 1(5) generally provides six years for a noncontract personal-injury claim not governed by a more specific limitation. Check the claim and defendant before using that period.

Government Claims. If the defendant is a municipality or covered employee, Minn. Stat. § 466.05 generally requires notice to the governing body within 180 days after discovery of the alleged loss or injury. The section also provides an actual-notice rule, excludes periods of incapacity caused by the injury, and treats wrongful-death notice separately. For claims arising on or after July 1, 2009, § 466.04 generally limits covered municipal liability to $500,000 per claimant and $1,500,000 per occurrence; check its different limits for hazardous-substance claims and specified nonprofit outdoor recreation claims.

Recreational Use. Minn. Stat. §§ 604A.22 and 604A.25 can alter an owner's duty when the owner permits recreational use without charge; assess the facts before pleading an ordinary duty.

Children on the Premises. A child trespasser's limited duty standard may be relevant, but a child lawfully invited onto the premises is assessed under the general reasonable-care duty. Foss v. Kincade, 766 N.W.2d 317 (Minn. 2009).

14. SOURCES AND REFERENCES

• Minn. Stat. § 604.01 — Comparative fault
• Minn. Stat. § 541.05, subd. 1(5) — Limitation for ordinary noncontract injury claims
• Minn. Stat. §§ 466.01, 466.04–466.05 — Municipal tort claims
• Minn. Stat. §§ 604A.22, 604A.25 — Recreational use duty and exceptions
• Minn. Stat. § 549.09 — Interest on verdicts, awards, and judgments
• Minn. R. Civ. P. 8.01 — Damages Demand
• Minn. Gen. R. Prac. 104 — Civil Cover Sheet
• Foss v. Kincade, 766 N.W.2d 317 (Minn. 2009) (discussing Peterson v. Balach)