How JustAnswer Works:
  • Ask an Expert
    Experts are full of valuable knowledge and are ready to help with any question. Credentials confirmed by a Fortune 500 verification firm.
  • Get a Professional Answer
    Via email, text message, or notification as you wait on our site.
    Ask follow up questions if you need to.
  • 100% Satisfaction Guarantee
    Rate the answer you receive.
Ask RGMacEsq Your Own Question
RGMacEsq
RGMacEsq, Attorney
Category: Business Law
Satisfied Customers: 16370
Experience:  Licensed Texas General Practice Attorney
19487448
Type Your Business Law Question Here...
RGMacEsq is online now
A new question is answered every 9 seconds

I got hurt in a business but the business owner did not have

Customer Question

i got hurt in a business but the business owner did not have liability insurance in place , can i sue his landlord ?
Submitted: 2 years ago.
Category: Business Law
Expert:  RGMacEsq replied 2 years ago.

Thank you for using JustAnswer.

That depends upon the nature of your injury. Can you be a bit more specific about how you were hurt, "who" was to "blame", etc...?

Customer: replied 2 years ago.
i was helping the business owner at the time to put a crane to lift heavy objets and the crane fall down on me and broke my hip and many parts of my body
Expert:  RGMacEsq replied 2 years ago.

Was the crane, or the controller of the crane, under the authority and direction of the landlord? In other words, how was the landlord to blame for this incident?

Customer: replied 2 years ago.
no the landlord was not present the blame is really no one but the business owner did not have insurance
Expert:  RGMacEsq replied 2 years ago.

I see. I'm sorry to hear that. A landlord is not "strictly liable" for the actions of a tenant. Rather, the landlord has to have some sort of culpability in the harm. If some fixture that the landlord was responsible for hurt you, for example, the landlord might be liable. But there has to first be a duty to act on the part of the landlord, a breach of that duty, and foreseeable harm. In other words, the landlord had to have had a duty to act, or a duty not to do something, and breached that duty, AND have reasonably foreseen the harm that occurred as a breach of that duty. The mere fact that the tenant does not have insurance will not make the landlord liable (unless it was the duty of the landlord to make sure that the tenant have insurance). As such, you would not have any case against the landlord. You could still sue the tenant, and any judgment that you obtain would be against the tenant (rather than an insurance policy paying) but you wouldn't have a case against the landlord because the landlord didn't do anything, and there's no strict liability in this situation.

I know this is probably not what you wanted to hear, but it is the law. I hope that clears things up anyway. If you have any other questions, please let me know. If not, and you have not yet, please rate my answer AND press the "submit" button, if applicable. Please note that I don't get any credit for my answer unless and until you rate it a 3, 4, 5 (good or better). Thank you, ***** ***** luck to you!

Expert:  RGMacEsq replied 2 years ago.

Did you have any other questions before you rate this answer?

Expert:  RGMacEsq replied 2 years ago.

Are you there? Please note that I am still here, awaiting your response or rating... (please note that rating closes this question out, so if there's nothing else, please rate it so that I can assist other customers that are waiting for answers to their questions)

Expert:  RGMacEsq replied 2 years ago.

I see that you have not responded in some time. Please note that this question is still open until you rate it. I believe that I have answered your question, but if you have any other questions, please let me know.If not, and you have not yet, please rate my answer. Please note that I don't get any credit for my answer unless and until you rate it a 3, 4, 5 (good or better). Thank you, ***** ***** good luck to you!