What Must Be Shown Under North Carolina Law
Most slip-and-fall cases are built on negligence. In plain terms, you generally have to show the property owner failed to act with reasonable care and that failure caused your injuries.
Key Requirements
- Duty: A store generally must use reasonable care to keep areas open to customers reasonably safe and to warn about hidden hazards it knows about (or should discover with reasonable inspection).
- Breach: You must show the store did something unsafe (or failed to do something reasonable), such as not cleaning a spill within a reasonable time or not placing adequate warning signs.
- Causation: You must connect the unsafe condition to the fall and to the injuries (for example, that the puddle caused the slip and the fall caused the head injury symptoms).
- Damages: You must show real harm, such as medical bills, time missed from work, and pain and suffering.
How Shoes and “Traction” Can Be Used Against You
Footwear arguments usually show up as a defense that you were not using reasonable care for your own safety. In North Carolina, that matters because contributory negligence can be a complete defense in many negligence cases.
- “Your shoes caused the fall”: The store may claim the tread was worn, the soles were slick, or the shoes were not appropriate for the conditions.
- “You should have noticed and avoided it”: The store may argue the hazard was obvious and that a careful person would have seen it and changed course—regardless of footwear.
- “You were moving unsafely”: They may pair the shoe argument with claims you were rushing, not watching where you were going, or carrying items that blocked your view.
Evidence That Commonly Helps (Even When Footwear Is Raised)
When “traction” becomes an issue, the goal is usually to keep the focus on the condition of the floor and the store’s notice of the hazard—not just what was on your feet.
- Documents: An incident report (helpful, but not always complete), any photos of the puddle/area, and any written communications about what happened.
- People: A witness statement from anyone who saw the fall or saw the puddle before the fall (including employees) can matter, especially on how long the hazard was there and whether warnings were present.
- Data: Store video (if it exists), time stamps, and the timeline of when the area was last inspected/cleaned can help show notice and reasonableness.
- Footwear facts (when available): Photos of the shoes and soles, proof they were ordinary everyday shoes, and whether they were wet/contaminated by the same liquid on the floor.
Common Defenses & Pitfalls in North Carolina
- Contributory negligence: North Carolina is a contributory negligence state. If the defense proves you were even slightly negligent and that contributed to the fall, it can potentially bar recovery. Footwear is one way they may try to argue this.
- “Open and obvious” hazard: If the condition was so apparent a reasonable person would have noticed it, the store may argue it had no duty to warn and that you should have avoided it.
- Distraction issues: On the other hand, facts that reasonably divert a customer’s attention (store layout, displays, directions from staff, normal shopping behavior) can matter when evaluating whether a reasonable person would have been looking down at the floor at that moment.
- Evidence loss: Video can be overwritten, and conditions change quickly. Delays can make it harder to prove how long the puddle was present or whether warning cones/signs were out.
How This Applies
Apply to the facts given: If you slipped on a puddle in a large retail store and an employee witnessed it and helped complete an incident report, the key issues often become (1) what the floor condition was, (2) whether the store knew or should have known about the liquid, and (3) what warnings or cleanup steps were taken. Your shoes may still be raised as a defense, but witness observations, any available video, and the documentation timeline can help keep the focus on the spill and the store’s response. Since you report head symptoms and ongoing care, consistent medical documentation and a clear timeline can also help connect the fall to your injuries.
What the Statutes Say (Optional)
- N.C. Gen. Stat. § 1-139 (Burden of proof of contributory negligence) – The party asserting contributory negligence generally has the burden to prove it.
Conclusion
In North Carolina, a store can try to use your shoes or “lack of traction” to argue contributory negligence, which can seriously affect a slip-and-fall claim. But footwear is not the whole case. The central questions are usually whether the store used reasonable care to find and address the puddle and whether the hazard was effectively warned about. One practical next step is to preserve what you can now—photos, the shoes, and a written timeline—while you speak with a licensed North Carolina attorney about how contributory negligence may be argued in your situation.
