Broomfield Premises Liability Lawyers Who Make Property Owners Answer for Unsafe Conditions

1. Actual notice

   The owner or their employees knew about the dangerous condition before you were hurt. A store associate who swept around a broken tile without flagging it for repair, a property manager who received a complaint about a broken exterior light, or a landlord who was told a common-area railing was loose all have actual notice of the hazard.

2. Constructive notice

   The condition existed long enough, or was visible enough, that the owner should have discovered it through reasonable inspection. A spill sitting in a Broomfield grocery aisle for ninety minutes, ice that accumulated on a retail entrance after a storm ended two days earlier, or a crumbling parking-lot surface at a strip mall along 120th Avenue are examples of hazards that create constructive notice even without a direct complaint.

3. Winter weather obligations specific to Broomfield

   Colorado courts recognize an ongoing-storm doctrine that gives owners some protection during active precipitation. But Broomfield's documented black-ice hazard on the US 36 corridor and at retail entrances along Wadsworth Boulevard means owners cannot simply point to a storm and disclaim responsibility. Once precipitation stops, reasonable clearance must follow within a reasonable time. Failing to salt or sand a heavily trafficked entrance or leaving sidewalk ice for days after a storm can establish constructive notice and liability.

4. Inspection records as evidence

   Property owners who conduct regular safety inspections have a documented defense. Owners who cannot produce inspection logs often lose the argument that they checked at all. We subpoena maintenance records, inspection schedules, and incident-report logs as a first step in every Broomfield premises case, because the absence of a record is itself powerful evidence that the owner's procedures were inadequate.

1. "The hazard was open and obvious."

   Colorado courts apply the open-and-obvious defense narrowly. A danger that is unreasonably dangerous despite being visible, or that appears in a location where customers are naturally looking at displays or merchandise rather than the floor, can still create liability. A wet FlatIron Crossing food court floor near a vendor station is not necessarily obvious to a shopper watching the menu board. We examine whether the hazard was actually apparent from where you were and what you were reasonably expected to be doing.

2. "You were partly at fault."

   Colorado follows modified comparative negligence under C.R.S. 13-21-111. Your recovery is reduced by your share of fault, but you can still recover as long as you are less than 50 percent responsible. If you are found 50 percent or more at fault, you cannot recover anything. Broomfield property insurers routinely inflate an injured person's fault percentage to cut the payout. We push back with evidence of the owner's inspection failures, the duration of the hazard, and the specific location and context of the fall.

3. "We had no notice of the condition."

   Actual knowledge is not always required. We answer the no-notice defense with surveillance footage showing how long the hazard was present, inspection logs or the documented absence of them, prior complaint records, and expert analysis of whether reasonable inspection procedures would have detected the condition in time. A property owner with no inspection log and a hazard that existed for 90 minutes before your fall has a difficult argument.

4. "You signed a liability waiver."

   Waivers can be enforceable in Colorado if they are clear, specific, and freely entered. But waivers of gross negligence or willful and wanton misconduct are generally unenforceable. A gym membership waiver does not protect a facility that knew a treadmill was malfunctioning and left it in service. We examine every waiver for scope, clarity, and enforceability before conceding any defense.

I wish I could leave more than 5 stars!

Grace Macaluso, 5-star Google review