The other side is going to argue that you were the responsible party in this matter, your actions were the direct cause of your injuries and the parties whom you are suing are not liable for damages. This is called comparative fault and it aims to prove that you hold some contributing factor in your slip and fall-related injuries and, regardless of whether you are found in part or completely liable in the reasons behind your slip and fall incident, you could receive little or no compensation.
Many states take comparative fault into account when a decision is being made in a slip and fall case. If it is decided that comparative fault applies and you hold some percentage of responsibility in the cause of your injuries, your damages would be commensurate with that percentage. As an example, if you are awarded $10,000 in damages, yet you are found to have 50% liability in the cause of your injuries, you would only be entitled to $5,000.
Some examples of comparative fault might include intoxication, walking while texting or being otherwise distracted, entering an area that is closed off to the public, or simply not paying attention to where you were walking due to carelessness or negligence on your part.
So here are some facts. If the conditions under which you fell down and sustained the injury are due to a slick surface due to weather or a torn carpet or an uneven walkway, these are all considered hazardous and it could be someone else’s responsibility for ensuring these conditions are avoided. A leaking pipe or a wet floor due to someone having just mopped it and failing to put out any warning to the general public could also mean someone else is liable for your injuries. Poor lighting is also a common cause of many slip and fall incidents. This poor illumination could be very dangerous, especially along stairwells and outdoor thoroughfares.