Connecticut Slip and Fall Laws: Proving Premises Liability

To win a slip and fall claim in Connecticut, you must show that the property owner was negligent, knew or should have known about the hazard, and that the hazard caused your injury. Connecticut follows a modified-comparative (51% bar) negligence rule under CGS Section 52-572h.

Proving a slip and fall claim in Connecticut

Connecticut premises liability law requires you to establish four elements. First, the property owner or occupier owed you a legal duty of care. Owners owe the highest duty to invitees (customers, guests on business premises), a lesser duty to licensees (social guests), and only a duty to avoid willful or wanton injury to trespassers.

Second, a dangerous condition existed on the property. Third, the owner must have had actual or constructive notice of the hazard. Actual notice means the owner knew about it directly. Constructive notice means the condition existed long enough that a reasonable owner exercising ordinary care would have discovered and fixed it. Courts look to the duration of the condition, the frequency of inspections, and what a reasonable inspection would have found to decide whether constructive notice exists.

Connecticut recognizes an important exception for self-service retail settings. In Kelly v. Stop & Shop, Inc., 281 Conn. 768 (2007), the Connecticut Supreme Court adopted the "mode of operation" rule: a plaintiff injured in a self-service store need not prove the business had actual or constructive notice of the specific hazard if the store's chosen method of operation made that type of hazard foreseeably recurring. The rule removes the notice hurdle in cases where the business model itself creates the risk.

Fourth, the hazard must have caused your injuries and resulting damages. Without notice, even a clearly dangerous condition may not be enough to establish liability.

The open-and-obvious doctrine in Connecticut

Connecticut does not treat an open-and-obvious hazard as an automatic bar to recovery. Courts apply Restatement (Second) of Torts Section 343A, which states that a possessor of land is not liable for harm caused by a known or obvious condition unless the possessor should have anticipated the harm despite the obviousness.

This means an owner can remain liable even for obvious hazards if it was foreseeable that an invitee would be distracted, would have no reasonable alternative route, or would encounter the hazard for reasons that outweigh the apparent risk. The leading authority is Warren v. Stancliff, 157 Conn. 216 (1968), which established the Section 343A framework in Connecticut.

Practically speaking, a plaintiff's awareness of the hazard does not defeat the claim outright. It instead becomes a factor in comparative fault under CGS Section 52-572h. If a jury finds the plaintiff was 30% responsible for encountering an obvious hazard, damages are reduced by 30%. Recovery is only barred if the plaintiff's total fault reaches 51% or more.

Ice, snow, and natural accumulation in Connecticut

Connecticut is not a no-duty natural-accumulation state. Landowners owe invitees an ordinary reasonable-care duty to address dangerous accumulations of ice and snow on their property. This distinguishes Connecticut from states like Illinois and Ohio, where naturally accumulated ice and snow generally create no liability.

The key limitation is the ongoing-storm doctrine established in Kraus v. Newton, 211 Conn. 191 (1989). Under that rule, in the absence of unusual circumstances, a property owner is not required to clear outside walks and steps while a storm is actively in progress. The owner must act within a reasonable time after the storm ends, but is not negligent for failing to remove accumulations during the storm itself.

Two important caveats: First, ice or snow that predates the current storm remains actionable regardless of whether a new storm is underway. Second, "unusual circumstances" can override the storm-in-progress suspension. If you fell on ice during a storm but that ice was from a prior freeze or from a drainage defect unrelated to the current weather, the ongoing-storm doctrine may not apply. The ordinary reasonable-care standard governs, and liability turns on whether the owner had reasonable time to discover and address the hazard.

How fault is shared: Connecticut's negligence rule

Connecticut follows modified-comparative negligence with a 51% bar, codified in CGS Section 52-572h(b). Under this rule, a plaintiff may recover only if the plaintiff's own negligence "was not greater than the combined negligence" of the defendant or defendants. Recovery is permitted when the plaintiff's fault is 50% or less, but is completely barred when the plaintiff's fault reaches 51% or more.

When recovery is permitted, damages are reduced in proportion to the plaintiff's percentage of fault. For example, a plaintiff found 30% at fault who suffered $100,000 in damages recovers $70,000. Section 52-572h(f) also requires the trier of fact to apportion fault among all parties, including any defendants who have settled.

The rule applies to negligence actions. Claims based on recklessness or intentional torts are treated differently and are not subject to the same comparative-fault reduction framework.

Deadlines: statute of limitations and government claims

The standard personal-injury statute of limitations in Connecticut is 2 years, under CGS Section 52-584. The clock starts when the injury is first sustained or discovered, or when it reasonably should have been discovered. Importantly, Section 52-584 also imposes a 3-year outer statute of repose: no action may be brought more than 3 years from the date of the act or omission that caused the injury, even if the injury was not discovered until later.

If you were injured on government property, strict pre-lawsuit notice requirements apply and missing them can end your claim entirely. For falls on defective municipal roads, bridges, or public sidewalks, CGS Section 13a-149 requires written notice of the injury, including a general description of the cause, time, and place, delivered to the town clerk or a selectman within 90 days of the injury. Suit must then be filed within 2 years. Courts apply this requirement strictly.

Other government falls have different windows. Claims tied to a negligent municipal employee under CGS Section 7-465 require written notice within 6 months. Claims against the State of Connecticut itself must be presented to the Office of the Claims Commissioner within 1 year under CGS Section 4-148.

For more on Connecticut's general personal-injury deadlines, see the Connecticut statute of limitations page.

What a Connecticut slip and fall claim is worth

A Connecticut slip and fall settlement or verdict can include economic damages (medical bills, lost wages, future medical care, rehabilitation costs) and non-economic damages (pain and suffering, emotional distress, loss of enjoyment of life). Connecticut does not impose a general statutory cap on non-economic damages in personal-injury cases.

Your recovery is directly reduced by your share of comparative fault under CGS Section 52-572h. A 25% finding of fault against you reduces a $200,000 recovery to $150,000. If you are found 51% or more at fault, you recover nothing, regardless of the severity of your injuries.

Claim value also depends on the severity of the injury, the clarity of the owner's notice of the hazard, the strength of the ongoing-storm or open-and-obvious defense, and whether government notice requirements were met. Use the Connecticut slip and fall settlement calculator for a rough estimate based on your specific facts.

This article is general legal information, not legal advice. Premises liability law varies by state and changes, and case values depend on the specific facts. For advice about a specific fall, consult a licensed attorney in Connecticut.

More Connecticut Laws

• Connecticut AI Meeting Recording Laws
• Connecticut Alimony Laws
• Connecticut At-Will Employment Laws
• Connecticut Car Accident Laws
• Connecticut Car Seat Laws
• Connecticut Child Support Laws
• Connecticut Common Law Marriage Laws
• Connecticut Data Privacy Laws
• Connecticut Dog Bite Laws
• Connecticut Emancipation Laws
• Connecticut Expungement Laws
• Connecticut Hit and Run Laws
• Connecticut Lemon Laws
• Connecticut Power of Attorney Laws
• Connecticut Recording Laws
• Connecticut Self-Defense Laws

Sources

• Connecticut General Statutes Chapter 925 (CGS Section 52-572h and related comparative-fault provisions)
• CGS Section 52-584 (personal-injury statute of limitations, 2 years, 3-year repose)
• CGS Section 13a-149 (municipal road/bridge/sidewalk defect notice, 90 days)
• CGS Section 7-465 (municipal employee indemnification, 6-month notice)
• CGS Section 4-148 (claims against the State, 1-year Claims Commissioner deadline)
• Warren v. Stancliff, 157 Conn. 216 (1968) (Restatement Section 343A open-and-obvious framework)
• Kelly v. Stop & Shop, Inc., 281 Conn. 768 (2007) (mode-of-operation rule adopted; self-service retail hazard notice exception)
• Kraus v. Newton, 211 Conn. 191 (1989) (ongoing-storm doctrine)

---

See also: Slip and Fall Laws by State | Connecticut Slip and Fall Settlement Calculator