DEMAND FOR SETTLEMENT - PREMISES LIABILITY / SLIP AND FALL

STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA

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

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]
Property Manager: [Management Company Name, if applicable]
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 [County] County, North Carolina. This letter constitutes our formal demand for settlement and provides a comprehensive analysis of liability under North Carolina law, our client's injuries, and damages.

I. NORTH CAROLINA-SPECIFIC LEGAL FRAMEWORK

A. Statute of Limitations

Under North Carolina General Statutes Section 1-52(16), the statute of limitations for personal injury claims, including premises liability, is three (3) years from the date of injury. This incident occurred on [Date], and therefore the limitations period expires on [Expiration Date].

For claims against governmental entities: Under N.C. Gen. Stat. Section 143-299, written notice must be provided within three (3) years of the incident. However, claims against local governments and their employees require compliance with N.C. Gen. Stat. Section 160A-485 (municipalities) or Section 153A-435 (counties).

B. Premises Liability Duty Standards Under North Carolina Law

North Carolina maintains the traditional common law classification of entrants:

Business Invitees (highest duty): Property owners owe invitees a duty to exercise ordinary care to maintain the premises in a reasonably safe condition and to warn of hidden dangers or unsafe conditions of which the owner has knowledge or could have discovered by reasonable inspection. Roumillat v. Simplistic Enterprises, Inc., 331 N.C. 57 (1992).

Licensees: Property owners owe a duty to refrain from willful or wanton injury and to exercise ordinary care to warn of hidden dangers known to the owner.

Trespassers: Property owners owe only a duty to refrain from willful or wanton injury.

Our client was a business invitee entitled to the highest duty of care.

C. CONTRIBUTORY NEGLIGENCE - CRITICAL ISSUE

North Carolina is one of only four jurisdictions that follows the pure contributory negligence doctrine. Under this rule, any negligence on the part of the plaintiff, however slight, completely bars recovery. Smith v. Fiber Controls Corp., 300 N.C. 669 (1980).

OUR CLIENT WAS NOT CONTRIBUTORILY NEGLIGENT. [He/She] was exercising due care for [his/her] own safety at the time of the incident:

• Our client was walking carefully and attentively
• Our client was using the premises in a foreseeable and intended manner
• The hazardous condition was not open and obvious
• Our client had no prior knowledge of the dangerous condition
• Our client could not have avoided the hazard through the exercise of reasonable care
• [Additional specific facts demonstrating due care]

Last Clear Chance Doctrine: Even if your insured were to allege contributory negligence, North Carolina recognizes the doctrine of last clear chance. If the defendant had the last clear opportunity to avoid the injury, the plaintiff's contributory negligence is not a bar. Watson v. White, 309 N.C. 498 (1983).

D. Snow and Ice Liability in North Carolina

North Carolina generally follows the natural accumulation rule for snow and ice. Property owners are typically not liable for injuries caused by natural accumulations of ice and snow.

HOWEVER, liability may attach when:
- The property owner creates an unnatural accumulation
- The owner's actions exacerbate or worsen a natural condition
- The owner has notice of a specific recurring hazard
- Water runoff from the building creates artificial ice accumulation

See Roumillat v. Simplistic Enterprises, Inc., 331 N.C. 57 (1992).

[If ice/snow case:] The hazardous condition at issue was [an unnatural accumulation created by defendant's actions / created or exacerbated by defendant's negligent maintenance / a recurring hazard of which defendant had notice].

E. Notice Requirements

Under North Carolina law, to establish liability, a plaintiff must prove:

1. The owner created the dangerous condition; OR
2. The owner had actual knowledge of the dangerous condition; OR
3. The owner had constructive knowledge - the condition existed for a sufficient time that the owner should have discovered it through reasonable inspection. Roumillat v. Simplistic Enterprises, Inc., 331 N.C. 57 (1992).

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 (interior and exterior cameras)
• Surveillance footage from 48 hours before and after the incident
• Incident/accident reports prepared by employees or management
• Witness statements taken at the time of incident
• Maintenance logs and repair records for the area of the fall
• Inspection records and checklists for the date of incident and prior 12 months
• Cleaning schedules and logs
• Weather records and reports from the date of incident
• Prior complaints regarding the hazardous condition
• Prior incidents or falls at the same or similar location
• Work orders and maintenance requests for the area
• Photographs of the incident location
• Written policies and procedures for maintenance, inspection, and safety
• Training records for employees responsible for premises safety
• All communications regarding the incident
• Insurance policies applicable to this claim

North Carolina courts impose sanctions for spoliation of evidence, including adverse inference instructions. McLain v. Taco Bell Corp., 137 N.C. App. 179 (2000).

III. STATEMENT OF FACTS

A. The Premises

The incident occurred at [Property Address], which is [describe property type - e.g., "a retail shopping center," "a grocery store," "a restaurant," "an apartment complex," "an office building," "a hotel," etc.]. At all relevant times, [Property Owner Name] owned, operated, possessed, maintained, and/or controlled the subject premises.

[If property manager involved:]
[Management Company Name] was responsible for the day-to-day management, maintenance, inspection, and safety of the 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]

[CUSTOMIZE BASED ON TYPE OF HAZARD:]

• Wet/Slippery Floor: A liquid substance [water / spilled merchandise / cleaning solution / grease] was present on the floor in the [specific location], creating an extremely slippery and dangerous walking surface. There were no warning signs, cones, or barriers in place to alert invitees to this hazard.

• Uneven Walking Surface: A raised or uneven section of [flooring / sidewalk / parking lot / threshold / carpet] created a tripping hazard. The elevation change was [describe height differential] and was not marked, repaired, or remediated.

• Snow/Ice Accumulation: [An unnatural accumulation of / Artificial conditions causing] snow and/or ice had developed at [location] due to [describe defendant's actions that caused or exacerbated the condition].

• Defective Stairs/Steps: The [stairway / steps] at [location] were defective and dangerous due to [describe defect].

• Inadequate Lighting: The [location] was inadequately lit, obscuring the hazardous condition.

C. The Incident

On [Date of Incident], at approximately [Time], our client was [describe what client was doing] when [describe the fall]:

[Detailed narrative of the incident]

Our client's conduct was entirely reasonable under the circumstances. [He/She] was [walking at a normal pace / paying attention to surroundings / using the premises in the intended manner / etc.]. The hazardous condition was not visible or apparent, and our client had no reason to anticipate its presence.

D. Response to the Incident

[Describe what happened after the fall]

IV. LIABILITY ANALYSIS

A. Duty of Care Under North Carolina Law

Under North Carolina law, [Property Owner Name] owed our client, a business invitee, the following duties:

1. To exercise ordinary care to keep the premises in a reasonably safe condition - Roumillat v. Simplistic Enterprises, Inc., 331 N.C. 57 (1992)
2. To warn of hidden dangers or unsafe conditions known to the owner
3. To conduct reasonable inspections to discover dangerous conditions
4. Not to expose invitees to unreasonable risks of harm

B. Breach of Duty

Your insured breached these duties by:

1. Created the Condition:
[If defendant created the condition - describe]

2. Actual Notice:
[If evidence of actual knowledge - describe]

3. Constructive Notice:
The dangerous condition existed for a sufficient length of time that the defendant, in the exercise of ordinary care, should have discovered and remediated it.

[Include evidence of constructive notice]

C. Causation

The dangerous condition described above was the actual and proximate cause of our client's fall and resulting injuries.

D. Contributory Negligence Defense - COMPLETELY INAPPLICABLE

We emphatically reject any assertion of contributory negligence. The evidence unequivocally establishes that our client was exercising due care:

1. Careful Walking: Our client was walking at a normal pace, paying attention to [his/her] surroundings
2. Hidden Danger: The hazardous condition was not open and obvious - it was [describe why hazard was hidden]
3. No Warning: There were no warning signs, barriers, or other indications of danger
4. Foreseeable Use: Our client was using the premises exactly as intended by the property owner
5. No Prior Knowledge: Our client had no reason to expect or anticipate the dangerous condition
6. Unable to Avoid: Even a reasonably prudent person could not have avoided this hazard

Under North Carolina law, a plaintiff is only required to exercise ordinary care for their own safety. Our client met and exceeded this standard.

Last Clear Chance: Furthermore, even if there were any evidence of contributory negligence (which there is not), defendant had the last clear chance to prevent this injury by properly maintaining the premises, conducting adequate inspections, and remediating the hazard. Watson v. White, 309 N.C. 498 (1983).

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 primary diagnoses]

B. Treatment Chronology

Emergency Care - [Date]:
[Details]

Surgical Intervention (If Applicable):
[Details]

Follow-Up Care:
[Details]

Physical Therapy/Rehabilitation:
[Details]

C. Current Status and Prognosis

[Describe current condition and prognosis]

VI. DAMAGES

A. Past Medical Expenses

B. Future Medical Expenses

C. Lost Wages and Earning Capacity

D. Pain and Suffering / Non-Economic Damages

North Carolina permits full recovery for pain and suffering in premises liability cases. There are no caps on compensatory non-economic damages. Our client has suffered and continues to suffer:

• Physical pain and suffering
• Emotional distress
• Loss of enjoyment of life
• [Additional non-economic damages]

E. Summary of Damages

VII. GOVERNMENT ENTITY CLAIMS

[USE THIS SECTION ONLY IF DEFENDANT IS GOVERNMENT ENTITY]

State Entities:

North Carolina has waived sovereign immunity to the extent of liability insurance coverage. N.C. Gen. Stat. Section 143-291 et seq. (State Tort Claims Act).

Municipal Entities:

Claims against cities require compliance with N.C. Gen. Stat. Section 160A-485. Claims against counties require compliance with N.C. Gen. Stat. Section 153A-435.

Written notice requirements apply per the applicable statutory scheme.

VIII. SETTLEMENT DEMAND

A. Demand Amount

Based upon the clear liability of your insured, the complete absence of any contributory negligence on the part of our client, the severity of our client's injuries, and the substantial damages incurred, we hereby demand the sum of:

$[DEMAND AMOUNT]

B. Time for Response

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

Failure to respond or failure to make a reasonable offer will result in immediate filing of suit in the General Court of Justice, Superior Court Division, [County] County, North Carolina.

C. Offer of Judgment Considerations

Please be aware that N.C. Gen. Stat. Section 1A-1, Rule 68 provides for offers of judgment with potential cost-shifting implications.

IX. DOCUMENTATION ENCLOSED

• Complete medical records from all treating providers
• Itemized medical bills
• Photographs of the incident location
• Photographs of injuries
• Incident report (if obtained)
• Employment records and wage verification
• Weather records (if applicable)
• HIPAA authorizations

X. CONCLUSION

The evidence in this case establishes clear and indisputable liability under North Carolina premises liability law. The dangerous condition was either created by your insured, was known to your insured, or existed for a sufficient time that it should have been discovered and remediated.

Critically, our client was not contributorily negligent. [He/She] was exercising due care for [his/her] own safety, was using the premises in a foreseeable manner, and had no ability to discover or avoid the hidden hazard.

Given North Carolina's contributory negligence rule, you may be tempted to deny this claim. We urge you to evaluate the evidence carefully. A jury will find our client's testimony credible and will find that [he/she] was exercising due care. The significant exposure your insured faces warrants serious settlement consideration.

I look forward to your prompt response.

Respectfully submitted,

[FIRM NAME]

By: _________________________________
[Attorney Name]
North Carolina State Bar No. [Number]
Attorney for [Client Name]

ENCLOSURES: [List]

cc: [Client Name]
[File]

NORTH CAROLINA-SPECIFIC PRACTICE NOTES

• CONTRIBUTORY NEGLIGENCE: Any fault by plaintiff completely bars recovery. Smith v. Fiber Controls Corp., 300 N.C. 669 (1980). This is the most critical issue in NC premises cases.

• Last Clear Chance: Exception to contributory negligence if defendant had last opportunity to avoid injury. Watson v. White, 309 N.C. 498 (1983).

• Notice Requirement: Must prove defendant created condition, had actual notice, or had constructive notice. Roumillat v. Simplistic Enterprises, Inc., 331 N.C. 57 (1992).

• Natural Accumulation Rule: Generally no liability for natural snow/ice unless defendant created or exacerbated condition.

• Punitive Damages: Capped at greater of three times compensatory damages or $250,000. N.C. Gen. Stat. Section 1D-25.

• Joint and Several Liability: Abolished; defendants liable only for their percentage of fault. N.C. Gen. Stat. Section 1B-1.

• No Compensatory Damage Caps: North Carolina does not cap compensatory damages.

• Collateral Source Rule: Evidence of collateral source payments admissible to reduce damages. N.C. Gen. Stat. Section 8C-1, Rule 413.

• Venue: County where cause of action arose or where defendant resides. N.C. Gen. Stat. Section 1-82.