Slip and fall accidents fall under a type of personal injury claim that can happen for many reasons, from sliding on a puddle in a grocery aisle to tripping on a loose rug in a hotel lobby. In legal terms,
a slip and fall is a claim based on the idea that a property owner failed to keep the premises reasonably safe.
When you’re injured this way, filing a claim against the responsible party is often the best way to seek compensation for your damages. As the claim progresses, you might be given the option to settle and wonder what that really means for your case. Do most slip and fall cases settle out of court, or should you try to take the case to trial?
How Often Do Slip and Fall Cases Settle Out of Court?
Based on widely cited
legal statistics, around 90–95% of personal injury cases settle before ever reaching trial. Slip and fall cases are a type of personal injury, so your case will also likely settle instead of going to court.
Why Do So Many Slip and Fall Cases Settle?
There are several common reasons why people choose a
slip and fall settlement instead of taking their case to trial.
Trials Are Expensive
The insurance company will have experienced defense attorneys working to protect its interests, so you need a lawyer to level the playing field and present your case effectively. But once a case heads toward trial, the costs can rise quickly for both you and your attorney.
Most personal injury lawyers work on contingency, meaning they’re paid a percentage of what you recover. In Arizona, that’s often about one-third of a settlement, but it can increase to around 40% if the case goes to trial because of the added time, preparation and risk.
Trials also bring extra expenses, such as filing fees, expert witnesses, depositions and transcripts. Your lawyer usually advances these costs, but they’re paid back out of your settlement or award. Settling earlier can reduce these expenses and help both you and your attorney avoid unnecessary financial strain.
Trials Are Risky
Trials are unpredictable. Once a jury begins deliberating, there are no guarantees about the outcome. While medical bills and lost wages can be calculated, damages for pain and suffering are subjective. A property owner may worry that a jury will award far more than what was discussed in settlement talks, which often encourages them to settle before trial.
At the same time, you face the risk that jurors could decide you were also at fault and reduce your compensation or award nothing at all. Because of that uncertainty, many slip and fall cases settle. A negotiated agreement offers a clearer, more controlled result than leaving your recovery in the hands of a jury.
Evidence Isn’t Always Clear
Proving
who is liable in a slip-and-fall case can be challenging. Arizona premises-liability law requires you to prove that the property owner owed you a duty of care, breached that duty and caused your injuries. In other words, you must show that the owner knew or should’ve known about the hazard and failed to fix it.
At the same time, Arizona follows a doctrine of pure comparative negligence, meaning your compensation can be reduced by your percentage of fault. If you were 20% at fault for not watching where you were walking, your damages will be reduced by that amount. Both sides may agree that settling is safer than battling over contested facts.
Settling Saves Time
