New York Slip and Fall Settlement Calculator
Get a rough estimate of what a New York slip-and-fall claim might be worth. Enter your medical bills and losses and answer a few plain questions — the tool weighs how provable the owner's fault is and your share of fault. This is an estimate to understand the factors, not a prediction or an offer.
This is a rough estimate, not a prediction or an offer.
Slip-and-fall claims turn on proving the property owner was at fault — there is no formula that predicts a settlement. This shows the factors and a wide range to help you understand value. Consult a New York premises-liability attorney about your case.
Enter the medical bills and losses to see an estimated range
The multiplier method is a rough starting point, not a guarantee. Slip-and-fall value depends most on proving the owner's fault and on the available insurance. An attorney is the only way to value your specific claim. This tool is not legal advice and RecordingLaw.com is not a law firm.
How the Estimate Works
No tool can predict a slip-and-fall settlement. This calculator applies the multiplier method (pain and suffering as a multiple of your medical bills), then does something the thin online calculators skip: it weighs how provable the owner's fault is. A spill the staff caused or knew about is worth far more than a hazard nobody can show the owner knew about. It then estimates your own comparative fault from a few plain questions and applies New York's rules.
Proving the Owner Was at Fault
Premises liability has four parts: a dangerous condition existed, the owner knew or should have known about it, they failed to fix it or warn you, and that caused your injury. The middle part — notice — is where most slip-and-fall cases are won or lost. Strong evidence (an incident report, photos of the hazard, surveillance video, cleaning and maintenance logs, prior complaints) is what turns a claim from a token offer into real money. A posted warning sign or cone works against you: it shows the owner did warn, and it makes the hazard "open and obvious," shifting fault onto you.
New York Premises-Liability Rules
Open-and-obvious hazards. In New York, an open-and-obvious hazard is only a comparative-fault factor (it reduces, not bars). In New York, an open-and-obvious hazard does NOT bar a premises-liability claim or negate the landowner's duty. Under Tagle v. Jakob, 97 N.Y.2d 165 (N.Y. 2001), the Court of Appeals held that while the obvious nature of a danger may relieve the duty to WARN, it "will not, as a matter of law, relieve a landowner of all duty to maintain his or her premises in a reasonably safe condition." The obviousness of the hazard instead bears on the injured party's comparative negligence (and on foreseeability), reducing — but not defeating — recovery. Appellate courts consistently apply this (see, e.g., Westbrook v. WR Activities-Cabrera Markets, 5 A.D.3d 69 (1st Dep't 2004)): open-and-obvious goes to comparative fault, not duty. Distinct from the separate "trivial defect" doctrine (Trincere v. County of Suffolk, 90 N.Y.2d 976 (1997)), under which a genuinely trivial, non-actionable defect can defeat a claim on the merits.
Ice and snow. New York applies an ordinary reasonable-care duty to ice and snow, so a poorly-maintained walkway can support a claim. New York does NOT follow the Illinois/Ohio "natural accumulation" no-duty rule. A property owner owes an ordinary reasonable-care duty to remove or remedy snow and ice — including naturally accumulated ice/snow — within a reasonable time. The principal limitation is the judicially created "storm-in-progress" (continuing-storm) rule: a landowner is not liable for icy/snowy conditions while a storm is ongoing or for a reasonable time after it ends, the time needed to remediate (Solazzo v. New York City Transit Authority, 6 N.Y.3d 734 (2005)). Once that reasonable period passes — or where pre-existing/old ice or negligent snow-removal created the hazard — the ordinary duty to maintain reasonably safe premises applies and liability can attach.
Public property. If you fell on government property, New York requires a formal notice of claim — often within about 90 days, much shorter than the normal deadline. Falls on state/municipal property require a Notice of Claim within 90 days. General Municipal Law (GML) § 50-e(1)(a) requires that, in any tort case where notice of claim is a condition precedent to suing a public corporation (city, county, town, village, school district, public authority), the notice "shall comply with and be served in accordance with the provisions of this section within ninety days after the claim arises." This is strictly enforced and runs separately from the 3-year personal-injury statute of limitations. (Claims against the State of New York itself in the Court of Claims are governed by Court of Claims Act § 10, which generally requires a claim or notice of intention within 90 days as well.) GML § 50-i also imposes a shortened 1-year-and-90-day limitations period for actions against municipalities.
Your Fault & the Deadline to File
New York follows pure comparative negligence. Your award is reduced by your share of fault, but you can still recover something even if you were mostly at fault.
CPLR 1411(a) adopts pure comparative fault: a plaintiff's culpable conduct (including contributory negligence and assumption of risk) never bars recovery; damages are simply reduced in proportion to the plaintiff's share of fault, so a 99%-at-fault plaintiff can still recover 1%. NOTE the one carve-out in CPLR 1411(b) (Insurance Law Article 51): for motor-vehicle no-fault "serious injury" actions, a plaintiff who is MORE at fault than the defendant(s) is barred — but for general (non-auto) personal injury the pure-comparative rule governs. Estimator should treat NY as pure-comparative.
New York generally requires a slip-and-fall lawsuit to be filed within 3 years of the fall (the statute of limitations). Standard personal-injury suits must be filed within 3 years of the injury (CPLR 214(5)). Medical malpractice has a shorter 2.5-year deadline, and claims against municipalities require a 90-day notice of claim with a 1-year-and-90-day deadline. Source: Tagle v. Jakob, 97 N.Y.2d 165 (N.Y. 2001) (open-and-obvious = comparative factor, not a duty bar); Solazzo v. New York City Transit Auth., 6 N.Y.3d 734 (N.Y. 2005) (storm-in-progress; ordinary reasonable-care duty for snow/ice); N.Y. Gen. Mun. Law § 50-e (90-day notice of claim). Also: CPLR § 214(5) (3-year PI SOL); CPLR § 1411 (pure comparative negligence)..
- Open-and-obvious is NOT a defense that defeats the case in New York. Per Tagle v. Jakob (Court of Appeals, 2001), an obvious hazard may eliminate the duty to WARN but never relieves the landowner of the duty to keep the premises reasonably safe — it only reduces recovery as a comparative-fault factor.
- New York rejects the 'natural accumulation' no-duty rule. Landowners owe ordinary reasonable care to clear naturally accumulated snow and ice within a reasonable time.
- The key snow/ice limit is the 'storm-in-progress' rule (Solazzo v. NYC Transit Auth., 2005): no liability while a storm is ongoing or for a reasonable time after it ends to allow cleanup. Old ice, refrozen melt, or negligent shoveling can still create liability.
- If you fall on government property (city sidewalk, public building, park, school, public authority/subway), you generally must serve a Notice of Claim within 90 DAYS under GML § 50-e — a hard, separate deadline from the 3-year lawsuit limit. Suits against municipalities also face a shortened 1-year-and-90-day SOL under GML § 50-i.
- Beware the separate 'trivial defect' doctrine (Trincere v. County of Suffolk, 1997): a minor, non-actionable surface irregularity can defeat a claim on the merits based on its width, depth, elevation, and the surrounding circumstances — but there is no fixed height threshold.
Frequently Asked Questions
How much is my New York slip and fall claim worth?
No one can tell you a number in advance, and slip-and-fall is harder than a car accident because you must prove the owner was at fault. A rough estimate adds your economic damages and a pain-and-suffering multiplier, discounts it by how provable the owner's fault is, and reduces it for your share of fault under New York's pure comparative negligence rule. The available insurance also caps recovery — an attorney is the only way to value your specific case.
Does a "wet floor" sign hurt my New York claim?
Yes, usually. A posted warning shows the owner satisfied part of their duty to warn and makes the hazard "open and obvious," which shifts fault onto you. In New York, an open-and-obvious hazard is only a comparative-fault factor (it reduces, not bars). It reduces — and sometimes defeats — a claim, but not always (a hidden or inadequate sign may not help the owner).
Can I sue for a fall on ice or snow in New York?
New York applies an ordinary reasonable-care duty to ice and snow, so a poorly-maintained or unaddressed icy walkway can support a claim, subject to your own comparative fault. This is general information, not legal advice — consult a New York attorney.
How long do I have to file in New York?
Generally 3 years from the fall. If you fell on public property, a much shorter notice-of-claim deadline (around 90 days) applies first. Standard personal-injury suits must be filed within 3 years of the injury (CPLR 214(5)). Medical malpractice has a shorter 2.5-year deadline, and claims against municipalities require a 90-day notice of claim with a 1-year-and-90-day deadline.
Is this calculator accurate?
It is a rough estimate to show the factors that drive value — not a prediction or an offer. Slip-and-fall outcomes vary enormously and depend on proving fault and on the available insurance. Treat any number here as a ballpark and consult a New York attorney.
Disclaimer
This estimator is for general informational purposes only and is not legal advice or a prediction of any outcome. RecordingLaw.com is not a law firm. The value of a slip-and-fall claim can only be assessed by a licensed attorney reviewing your specific facts.