Slip and Fall / Premises Liability Demand Letter - South Carolina

DEMAND FOR SETTLEMENT - PREMISES LIABILITY / SLIP AND FALL

STATE OF SOUTH CAROLINA

[FIRM NAME]
Attorneys at Law
[Street Address]
[City, South Carolina ZIP]
Telephone: [Phone]
Facsimile: [Fax]
Email: [Email]
Licensed in the State of South 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]
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], South Carolina. This letter constitutes our formal demand for settlement and provides a comprehensive analysis of liability under South Carolina law, our client's injuries, and damages.

I. SOUTH CAROLINA-SPECIFIC LEGAL FRAMEWORK

A. Statute of Limitations

Sections 15-3-530(5) and 15-3-535 generally require a personal-injury action to be commenced within three years after the claimant knew or, through reasonable diligence, should have known of the cause of action. Under Section 15-3-20(B), filing commences the action only if actual service is accomplished within 120 days. Government defendants and other special circumstances can change the analysis. Counsel must calculate and calendar the actual deadline from the complete facts rather than assume it runs automatically from the incident date.

B. Premises Liability Duty Standards Under South Carolina Law

South Carolina recognizes the traditional common law classifications of entrants onto property, with corresponding duties owed by property owners:

Business Invitee: An invitee enters at the property owner's express or implied invitation. A property owner owes an invitee reasonable or ordinary care for the invitee's safety, and a merchant must exercise ordinary care to keep the premises reasonably safe. Fountain v. Fred's, Inc., S.C. Sup. Ct. Op. No. 28086 (Mar. 2, 2022) (quoting Sims v. Giles, 343 S.C. 708, 541 S.E.2d 857 (Ct. App. 2001)). Depending on the facts, reasonable care may include:

1. Exercise reasonable care to keep the premises in a reasonably safe condition
2. Warn of hidden dangers or conditions unknown to the invitee
3. Conduct reasonable inspections directed to foreseeable hazards
4. Take reasonable precautions to protect invitees from foreseeable dangers

A possessor ordinarily need not protect an invitee from a danger that is known or obvious to the invitee, but a duty may remain when the possessor should anticipate harm despite that knowledge or obviousness. Whether the condition was discoverable, whether an inspection was reasonable, and whether distraction or anticipated encounter mattered are fact-sensitive questions. Fountain, Op. No. 28086.

C. Modified Comparative Negligence

South Carolina follows modified comparative negligence, judicially adopted in Nelson v. Concrete Supply Co., 303 S.C. 243, 399 S.E.2d 783 (1991). Under this rule:

• A plaintiff's recovery is reduced by their percentage of fault
• A plaintiff may recover if their negligence is "not greater than" the defendant's (i.e., 50% or less); recovery is barred only if the plaintiff's fault is greater than 50% (a plaintiff exactly 50% at fault still recovers — the "51% bar" rule). Nelson v. Concrete Supply Co., 303 S.C. 243, 399 S.E.2d 783 (1991)

Fault apportionment and joint-and-several liability among multiple defendants are separately governed by S.C. Code Ann. Section 15-38-15.

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

D. Constructive Notice Standard

Constructive notice may be shown when a condition existed long enough that, under the circumstances, the defendant should have discovered and remedied it through due care. A claimant should preserve evidence of duration, inspections, prior reports, the defendant's creation of the condition, and the defendant's control over the area. Fountain, Op. No. 28086 (quoting Anderson v. Winn-Dixie Greenville, Inc., 257 S.C. 75, 184 S.E.2d 77 (1971)).

E. Weather-Related Conditions

Do not assume a categorical natural-accumulation rule. Analyze a rain, ice, or snow condition under the ordinary premises framework: control of the area; creation and duration of the condition; actual or constructive knowledge; inspection practices; whether the danger was known or obvious; whether harm nevertheless should have been anticipated; and whether a removal or warning undertaking was performed reasonably. Fountain, Op. No. 28086. Customize this section only after investigating the weather timeline, drainage, maintenance records, and any remediation efforts.

F. Notice Requirements for Government Claims

For a covered governmental entity, Section 15-78-80 permits—but does not universally require—a verified claim. If used, it must be received by the designated recipient within one year after the loss was or should have been discovered. Section 15-78-110 generally requires suit within two years after discovery of the loss, extended to three years if the claimant first filed the verified claim. Section 15-78-120 generally limits recovery to $300,000 per person and $600,000 per occurrence and excludes punitive damages and prejudgment interest. Government status, immunity exceptions, the proper defendant, and service require separate review.

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
• Insurance policies applicable to this claim

South Carolina decisions recognize that proven spoliation may support an adverse-inference instruction. Turner v. Medical University of South Carolina, S.C. Ct. App. Op. No. 5723 (May 6, 2020) (citing Stokes v. Spartanburg Regional Medical Center, 368 S.C. 515, 629 S.E.2d 675 (Ct. App. 2006)). The availability and scope of any instruction or sanction depend on the evidence, preservation duty, prejudice, requested remedy, and court procedure. Please suspend routine destruction and preserve the listed material.

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," etc.] in [City], South Carolina. At all relevant times, [Property Owner Name] owned, operated, possessed, 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]

[CUSTOMIZE BASED ON TYPE OF HAZARD - Select applicable option:]

Wet/Slippery Floor: A liquid substance 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] created a tripping hazard that was not marked, repaired, or remediated.

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

Foreign Object/Debris: [Describe object] was present on the floor, creating a tripping hazard.

Ice/Snow Accumulation: [Describe the condition, weather timeline, drainage, duration, inspections, warnings, and any removal or treatment undertaken]

C. The Incident

On [Date of Incident], at approximately [Time], our client was [describe activity - e.g., "shopping at the premises," "visiting as a guest"] when [describe the fall in detail].

D. Notice and Knowledge

Your insured had actual and/or constructive knowledge of this hazardous condition:

Actual Knowledge:

• [Prior complaints about the same condition]
• [Condition was created by defendant's employees]
• [Employee acknowledgment of awareness]

Constructive Knowledge:

• The hazardous condition existed for a sufficient length of time that it should have been discovered through reasonable inspection
• [Evidence of duration - footprints, dirty appearance, accumulation size]
• [Inadequate inspection procedures]

IV. LIABILITY ANALYSIS UNDER SOUTH CAROLINA LAW

A. Elements of Premises Liability

Liability requires proof of a duty, breach, causation, and resulting damages. Premises status, possession or control, notice, reasonable inspection, obviousness, anticipated harm, and causation must be tied to admissible evidence. Fountain, Op. No. 28086.

B. Breach of Duty

Your insured breached its duty to our client by:

1. Failing to maintain the premises in a reasonably safe condition
2. Failing to conduct reasonable inspections to discover the dangerous condition
3. Failing to correct or warn of the dangerous condition
4. [Additional specific breaches]

C. Causation

The dangerous condition was the direct and proximate cause of our client's fall and resulting injuries. But for your insured's negligence, our client would not have been injured.

D. Comparative Negligence Defense - Inapplicable

We reject any assertion that our client was comparatively negligent:

• Our client was exercising reasonable care for [his/her] own safety
• The hazard was not open and obvious
• Our client had no reason to anticipate the dangerous condition
• [Additional factors]

V. INJURIES AND MEDICAL TREATMENT

A. Injuries Sustained

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

[List specific injuries with diagnoses]

B. Medical Treatment

Emergency Treatment: [Date, Provider, Treatment]

Surgical Intervention (if applicable): [Date, Procedure, Provider]

Ongoing Treatment: [Physical therapy, specialist care, etc.]

C. Current Status and Prognosis

[Describe current condition and prognosis from treating physicians]

VI. DAMAGES

A. Medical Expenses

Future Medical Expenses: $[Amount]

B. Lost Wages

C. Pain and Suffering

[Detailed description of physical pain, emotional distress, and loss of enjoyment of life]

D. Summary of Damages

VII. SETTLEMENT DEMAND

Based upon the liability evidence described above, the severity of our client's injuries, and the documented damages, we hereby demand:

$[DEMAND AMOUNT]

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

Should you fail to respond to this demand within the specified time, or should you fail to make a reasonable offer, we will file suit in the Court of Common Pleas of [County] County, South Carolina.

VIII. DOCUMENTATION ENCLOSED

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

IX. CONCLUSION

The evidence identified in this demand supports our client's premises-liability claim and claimed damages. We urge you to give this matter serious and prompt attention.

Respectfully submitted,

[FIRM NAME]

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

ENCLOSURES: As noted above

cc: [Client Name]
File

SOUTH CAROLINA PRACTICE NOTES

• Modified Comparative Negligence (51% bar): Plaintiff barred only if fault is greater than 50%; a plaintiff exactly 50% at fault still recovers. Nelson v. Concrete Supply Co., 303 S.C. 243, 399 S.E.2d 783 (1991) (judicially adopted, not statutory).
• Allocation (claims arising on or after January 1, 2026): Under the current Section 15-38-15, a defendant below 50% of total fault is several-only. Willful, wanton, reckless, intentional, and specified illegal-drug conduct is excepted. On a defendant's motion, qualifying disclosed nondefendant tortfeasors may be allocated fault, subject to statutory exclusions and procedures. Confirm the claim's accrual date before selecting the applicable version.
• Government Claims: A Section 15-78-80 verified claim is optional and, if used, is due within one year after discovery. Without that filing, suit generally is due within two years; with it, three years. General limits are $300,000 per person and $600,000 per occurrence. Sections 15-78-80, 15-78-110, 15-78-120.
• Punitive Damages: The complaint must request punitive damages without stating an amount. The claimant must prove willful, wanton, or reckless conduct by clear and convincing evidence. The ordinary limit is the greater of three times compensatory damages or the annually CPI-adjusted dollar amount (statutory base: $500,000), with statutory enhanced-limit and no-limit exceptions. Sections 15-32-510, 15-32-520, 15-32-530.
• Venue: Section 15-7-30 is entity- and defendant-specific. For many domestic entities, venue lies at the principal place of business when the claim arose or where the most substantial part of the alleged act or omission occurred; other defendant types require separate analysis.