Slip and Fall / Premises Liability Demand Letter - Alaska

DEMAND FOR SETTLEMENT - PREMISES LIABILITY / SLIP AND FALL

STATE OF ALASKA

[FIRM NAME]
Attorneys at Law
[Street Address]
[City, Alaska ZIP]
Telephone: [Phone]
Facsimile: [Fax]
Email: [Email]
Licensed in the State of Alaska

DATE: [Date]

VIA CERTIFIED MAIL, RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED
AND FIRST-CLASS MAIL

[Claims Representative Name / General Counsel]
[Property Owner / Management Company / Insurance Company Name]
[Street Address]
[City, State ZIP]

RE: PREMISES LIABILITY DEMAND - SLIP AND FALL
Our Client: [Client Full Name]
Date of Incident: [Date of Fall]
Location of Incident: [Full Address of Property]
Property Owner: [Property Owner Name]
Claim Number: [Claim Number, if assigned]

Dear [Recipient Name]:

This firm represents [Client Name] ("Claimant") for injuries sustained on [Date of Incident] at premises owned and/or controlled by your insured/client, located at [Property Address] in [City], Alaska. This letter constitutes our formal demand for settlement.

I. ALASKA-SPECIFIC LEGAL FRAMEWORK

A. Statute of Limitations

Alaska Stat. § 09.10.070 generally requires a personal-injury action to be commenced within two (2) years after accrual. Accrual, discovery, tolling, defendant identity, and special statutes can change the calculation. Do not state an expiration date until Alaska counsel has analyzed the facts.

B. Pure Comparative Negligence

Alaska follows pure comparative fault under Alaska Stat. § 09.17.060. Claimant fault reduces damages proportionally but does not bar recovery. Under § 09.17.080(d), judgment is generally entered against each liable party on a several-liability basis according to that party's percentage of fault.

Our client exercised reasonable care at all times and bears no responsibility for this incident.

C. Premises Liability Standard in Alaska

For improved property, Alaska applies ordinary negligence principles rather than specialized invitee/licensee rules. A landowner must act reasonably in maintaining property in a reasonably safe condition in view of all the circumstances, including likelihood and seriousness of injury and the parties' burdens of avoiding the risk. Webb v. City & Borough of Sitka, 561 P.2d 731, 733-35 (Alaska 1977); Alaska Civil Pattern Jury Instruction 06.01.

Under this standard, a property owner must exercise reasonable care to:

• Maintain the premises in a reasonably safe condition
• Discover dangerous conditions through reasonable inspection
• Remedy or warn of dangerous conditions

The owner's knowledge, foreseeability, severity of possible injury, and burden of precautions may bear on reasonableness. Limitations for unimproved property under Alaska Stat. § 09.65.200 must be analyzed separately.

D. Notice and Store Operations

Actual or constructive notice is relevant evidence, but it is not an element of a prima facie grocery-store slip-and-fall claim. The question is whether the proprietor acted reasonably under all the circumstances. Alaska expressly declined to adopt the mode-of-operation rule because notice is not a required element. Edenshaw v. Safeway, Inc., 186 P.3d 568, 569-71 (Alaska 2008). Develop evidence about inspections, recurring hazards, store operations, duration, prior incidents, and employee knowledge without pleading notice as an inflexible prerequisite.

F. Open and Obvious Danger Doctrine

Alaska recognizes that a defendant may have no duty to warn of an open and obvious condition and no duty to protect a claimant from obvious risks fundamentally created by the claimant's own conduct. The analysis is fact-sensitive and distinct from comparative fault. Carey-Thomann v. University of Alaska Fairbanks, Alaska Supreme Court Opinion No. 7809, at 5, 9-13 (May 1, 2026); McGlothlin v. Municipality of Anchorage, 991 P.2d 1273, 1279 & n.23 (Alaska 1999).

G. Snow and Ice Liability - CRITICAL IN ALASKA

Given Alaska's climate, snow and ice cases are particularly significant:

Apply the ordinary reasonable-care framework to the particular owner, property, and conditions; do not rely on a generic “natural accumulation” immunity or a categorical heightened commercial duty. Residential landlords have a statutory duty to keep common areas clean and safe under Alaska Stat. § 34.03.100(a)(2), which includes an obligation concerning snow and ice. Coburn v. Burton, 790 P.2d 1355, 1358 (Alaska 1990); Bolt v. United States, 509 F.3d 1028, 1031-35 (9th Cir. 2007) (applying Alaska law).

Factors Considered:

• The time elapsed since precipitation
• The foreseeability of foot traffic
• Industry custom and practice
• The burden of removal vs. risk of harm
• Prior notice of icy conditions

Whether snow or ice should have been removed, treated, or warned about depends on timing, foreseeability, traffic, control, governing contracts or statutes, available precautions, and the burden of avoiding the risk.

I. Landlord vs. Tenant Liability

Residential landlords must keep common areas clean and safe under Alaska Stat. § 34.03.100(a)(2). For conditions inside leased premises or involving a property manager, analyze the lease, control, statutory duties, assumed duties, notice, and causation. Kay v. Danbar, Inc., 132 P.3d 262, 270-72 (Alaska 2006).

J. Government Immunity - Alaska Tort Claims Act

Claims against the State of Alaska are governed by Alaska Stat. §§ 09.50.250-.300. Section 09.50.250 permits specified contract, quasi-contract, and tort claims in superior court but contains important exceptions, including discretionary-function and intentional-tort provisions. The general two-year statute may apply, and punitive damages may not be awarded against the State under § 09.50.280. Municipal and federal defendants require separate immunity and procedure analysis; do not assume a generic administrative notice rule.

K. Damage Caps

Alaska imposes caps on non-economic damages under Alaska Statutes Section 09.17.010:

• Severe permanent physical impairment or disfigurement: The greater of $1,000,000 or the injured person's life expectancy in years multiplied by $25,000
• All other cases: The greater of $400,000 or the injured person's life expectancy in years multiplied by $8,000

Under § 09.17.010(c), these limits do not apply to noneconomic losses resulting from an intentional or reckless act or omission. Confirm whether a specialized cap or exception governs the defendant or claim.

II. PRESERVATION OF EVIDENCE - LITIGATION HOLD NOTICE

YOU ARE HEREBY DIRECTED TO IMMEDIATELY PRESERVE ALL EVIDENCE relating to this incident and the subject premises, including but not limited to:

• All surveillance video footage from the date of incident
• Surveillance footage from 48 hours before and after the incident
• Incident/accident reports
• Witness statements
• Maintenance logs and repair records
• Inspection records and checklists
• Snow/ice removal records and contracts
• Weather records from the date of incident
• Prior complaints regarding the hazardous condition
• Prior incidents or falls at the same location
• Photographs of the incident location
• Written policies and procedures for maintenance
• Training records for employees
• All communications regarding the incident

Alaska remedies intentional destruction or concealment of evidence, but the response depends on timing and available discovery remedies. Traditional discovery sanctions are exclusive when sufficient; independent tort remedies are limited to intentional interference that cannot otherwise be adequately redressed. Allstate Insurance Co. v. Dooley, 243 P.3d 197, 200-03 (Alaska 2010). Please suspend routine destruction and preserve the listed materials.

III. STATEMENT OF FACTS

A. The Premises

The incident occurred at [Property Address], which is [describe property type]. At all relevant times, [Property Owner Name] owned, operated, maintained, and/or controlled the subject premises.

B. The Hazardous Condition

On the date of the incident, a dangerous and hazardous condition existed on the premises, specifically:

[DESCRIBE THE HAZARDOUS CONDITION IN DETAIL]

[For snow/ice cases: Describe accumulation, duration since precipitation, temperature conditions, and failure to treat or remove]

C. The Incident

On [Date of Incident], at approximately [Time], our client was lawfully present on the premises when [describe the fall in detail].

D. Notice and Reasonableness Evidence

[Use any supported evidence; notice is relevant but is not a required prima facie element under Edenshaw:]

Actual Knowledge: Your insured had actual knowledge of the hazardous condition because [describe evidence].

Constructive Knowledge / Inspection Evidence: The hazardous condition existed under circumstances in which a reasonable inspection or maintenance program should have discovered and addressed it. Evidence includes:

• [Evidence of duration]
• [Evidence of inspection failures]
• [Prior incidents]

IV. LIABILITY ANALYSIS

A. Duty of Care

Under Alaska's unified standard of reasonable care, your insured had a duty to:

1. Maintain the premises in a reasonably safe condition
2. Conduct reasonable inspections to discover dangerous conditions
3. Warn of or remedy dangerous conditions

B. Breach of Duty

Your insured breached its duty of care by:

• Failing to maintain the premises in a reasonably safe condition
• Failing to conduct reasonable inspections
• Failing to remedy or warn of the dangerous condition
• [For snow/ice: Failing to clear, treat, or warn of icy conditions despite adequate time to do so]
• [Additional specific breaches]

C. Comparative Fault

Our client exercised reasonable care at all times:

• [Describe client's reasonable conduct]
• Our client had no reason to anticipate the dangerous condition
• The hazard was not open and obvious under the circumstances

D. Causation

The dangerous condition was the direct and proximate cause of our client's injuries.

V. INJURIES AND MEDICAL TREATMENT

A. Summary of Injuries

As a direct and proximate result of the fall, our client sustained the following injuries:

[LIST INJURIES]

B. Medical Treatment

Emergency Treatment:
[Describe emergency care]

Follow-Up Treatment:
[Describe ongoing treatment]

Current Status and Prognosis:
[Describe current condition and prognosis]

VI. DAMAGES

A. Medical Expenses

Future Medical Expenses: $[Amount]

B. Lost Wages

C. Pain and Suffering (Subject to Statutory Caps)

[Describe pain and suffering]

Note: Non-economic damages are subject to caps under Alaska Stat. Section 09.17.010.

D. Summary of Damages

VII. SETTLEMENT DEMAND

Based upon the liability of your insured, the severity of our client's injuries, and the substantial damages incurred, we hereby demand:

$[DEMAND AMOUNT]

This demand will remain open for thirty (30) days from the date of this letter, expiring on [Expiration Date].

VIII. DOCUMENTATION ENCLOSED

• Complete medical records and bills
• Photographs of the incident location
• Photographs of injuries
• Weather records (if applicable)
• Incident report (if obtained)
• Employment records and lost wage documentation
• [Additional documentation]

IX. CONCLUSION

We contend that the evidence establishes that your insured failed to exercise reasonable care under the circumstances and that this failure caused our client's injuries.

We urge prompt attention to this matter.

Respectfully submitted,

[FIRM NAME]

By: _________________________________
[Attorney Name]
Alaska Bar Association No. [Number]
Attorney for [Client Name]

ENCLOSURES: As noted above

cc: [Client Name]
File

ALASKA-SPECIFIC PRACTICE NOTES

• Improved-Property Duty: Apply ordinary reasonable care under all circumstances; separately check AS 09.65.200 for unimproved property and any statute governing the owner or condition.

• Snow and Ice: Do not assert a categorical natural-accumulation immunity or heightened commercial duty. Analyze the owner, control, statutes or contract, timing, traffic, conditions, precautions, and burden of remediation.

• Non-Economic Damage Caps: Alaska Stat. Section 09.17.010 caps non-economic damages. Factor this into settlement valuation.

• Pure Comparative Negligence: Recovery reduced but not barred by plaintiff's fault.

• Notice / Mode of Operation: Notice is relevant but not a required prima facie element for a grocery-store slip-and-fall; Alaska declined the mode-of-operation rule. Edenshaw.

• Venue: Confirm the current text of Alaska R. Civ. P. 3 and any defendant-specific venue statute before filing.

• Prejudgment Interest: Alaska Stat. § 09.30.070 uses a variable statutory rate tied to the 12th Federal Reserve District discount rate and contains service/written-notice and exception rules. Calculate it for the claim year; do not use a fixed 10.5% rate.

• Current Official Sources: Alaska Statutes, Title 9: https://www.akleg.gov/statutesPDF/Title-9.pdf; Alaska Civil Pattern Jury Instruction 06.01: https://courts.alaska.gov/CVPJI/docs/06.01.docx