Sample Form Premises Liability Complaint in Nevada against Hotel Casino

Posted by: on Wed, May 08, 2013

Share this post

COME NOW, Plaintiffs MARK B and BRIDGET B, individuals (hereinafter “Plaintiffs”), by and through their attorneys of record, ALBRIGHT, STODDARD, WARNICK & ALBRIGHT, and as and for their Complaint against Defendants GOLDEN NUGGET, INC., a Nevada corporation, and GNLV CORP., a Nevada corporation, doing business as GOLDEN NUGGET LAS VEGAS HOTEL & CASINO (hereinafter “Defendants”), DOES I through X, and ROE CORPORATIONS I through XX, inclusive, allege and aver as follows:

JURISDICTION

1. At all times mentioned herein, the Plaintiffs were and are residents of __________.

2. Upon information and belief, at all times mentioned herein, Defendants GOLDEN NUGGET, INC., and GNLV, CORP., a Nevada corporation, doing business as GOLDEN NUGGET LAS VEGAS HOTEL & CASINO, were both Domestic Corporations duly organized under the laws of the State of Nevada, and authorized to conduct business in the State of Nevada.

3. The true names and capacities, whether individual, corporate, associate or otherwise, of Defendants DOES I through X and/or ROE CORPORATIONS I through XX, inclusive, are unknown to Plaintiffs, who therefore sue said Defendants by such fictitious names. The Plaintiffs are informed, believe and thereupon allege that the Defendants designated herein as DOES I through X and/or ROE CORPORATIONS I through XX, inclusive, are any one of the following:

(a) Parties responsible in some manner for the events and happenings herein referred to that caused injuries and damages proximately thereby to the Plaintiffs as herein alleged;
(b) Parties that are the agents, servants, employees and/or contractors of the Defendants, each of them acting within the course and scope of their agency, employment or contract;
(c) Parties that own, lease, manage, operate, secure, inspect, repair, maintain and/or are responsible for the premises referred to hereinafter;
(d) Parties that have assumed or retained the liabilities of any of the Defendants by virtue of an agreement, sale, transfer or otherwise; and/or
(e) Parties responsible for the design, manufacture, and/or installation of the disco ball at issue herein.

The Plaintiffs will ask leave of the Court to amend this Complaint to insert the true names and capacities of said Defendants, DOES I-X and ROE CORPORATIONS I-XX, inclusive, when the same have been ascertained by the Plaintiff, together with appropriate charging allegations, and to join said Defendants in the action.

GENERAL ALLEGATIONS

4. Plaintiffs repeat and reallege each and every foregoing paragraph set forth above and incorporate the same by reference as though fully set forth at length herein.

5. At all times mentioned herein, particularly on or about February 22, 2013, the Defendants owned, operated, controlled and maintained the property located at 129 East Fremont Street, Las Vegas, Nevada 89101, commonly known as the Golden Nugget Las Vegas Hotel and Casino.

6. On or about February 22, 2013, Plaintiffs attended a live performance of the Gordie Brown show in the Gordie Brown showroom within the Golden Nugget Las Vegas Hotel and Casino. After initially being seated, an usher at the Gordie Brown showroom invited the Plaintiffs to move to different seats, which seats were located directly beneath a large, heavy, glass disco ball.

7. During the show, suddenly and unexpectedly, the disco ball fell from the ceiling, directly onto Plaintiffs, violently striking them.

8. Plaintiff Mark Bittman (hereinafter sometimes “Mark”) was struck directly on and about the head with such force as to immediately shatter, crack and/or chip approximately twelve (12) of his teeth, and cause severe injury to his jaw, head, neck and back.

9. Plaintiff Bridget Bittman (hereinafter sometimes “Bridget”), seated next to her husband, was also struck by the falling disco ball in the hand and fingers, causing severe bruising.

10. Defendants are responsible for Plaintiffs’ injuries as the owners of the building within which Plaintiffs were injured, because they and/or their agents failed to properly install, or cause the proper installation of, secure, inspect, maintain and otherwise ensure that the disco ball installed on the Gordie Brown showroom ceiling did not fall on audience members seated directly beneath the disco ball.

11. As a direct and proximate result of being struck by the falling disco ball, Mark suffered severe damage to and/or loss of approximately twelve (12) of his natural teeth, requiring replacement and repair with artificial veneers and/or crowns and caps, which will require lifetime maintenance, repair and regular replacement.

12. Mark received trauma to his head causing a concussion, and injuries to his jaw, neck and back, which continue to cause severe pain and suffering.

13. Mark’s injuries prevent him from being able to fully perform his chosen career as a contractor, as he is unable to perform the manual labor required of his job in the same manner as he had previously been able to do, causing lost earnings and other damages. As Mark is self-employed, his contracting business has been required to retain the services of additional workers to perform labor he previously performed himself, at substantial cost and lost profits to him.

14. Mark’s injuries prevent him from eating many of the same foods and participating in many of the same activities that he enjoyed before the accident in the Golden Nugget.

15. Bridget also suffered the direct effects of the falling disco ball, being struck on her hand and fingers, causing severe bruising.

16. As a result of Plaintiffs injuries, Plaintiffs have sustained damages in excess of $10,000.00.

17. Plaintiffs have been required to retain the services of a law firm to prosecute this action and are entitled to reasonable attorneys’ fees.

FIRST CAUSE OF ACTION

(NEGLIGENCE)

18. Plaintiffs repeat and reallege each and every foregoing paragraph set forth above and incorporate the same by reference as though fully set forth at length herein.

19. The Defendants owed Plaintiffs a duty of care in selecting, purchasing, installing, affixing and securing a safe and secure disco ball, and in selecting those charged with the task of installing, securing, maintaining and inspecting the same.

20. The Defendants’ improper design, construction, manufacture and/or installation of the disco ball was a substantial factor in causing the injuries sustained by Plaintiffs.

21. The Defendants’ improper design, construction, manufacture and/or installation of the disco ball created an unreasonably dangerous condition which eventually caused injury to Plaintiffs.

22. The Defendants’ improper design, construction, manufacture and/or installation of the disco ball was a defect when the Defendants completed construction, manufacture and/or installation of the disco ball, such that the disco ball could not be safely used in the manner and for the purpose for which it was intended.

23. The Defendants owed Plaintiffs a duty to exercise due care in providing a safe place for audience members of the Gordie Brown show, including by ensuring that the facilities were safe and that installed fixtures located therein were properly installed, maintained, secured, and inspected and Defendants, and each of them, breached the Defendants’ duty of care.

24. The Defendants breached their standard and duty of care to Plaintiffs, including, without limitation, by failing to ensure that the fixtures at their facility were safe and secure, which breach led to their disco ball suddenly becoming detached from the ceiling and falling directly upon Mark’s head and Bridget’s hand and fingers.

25. As a direct and proximate result of the negligence and carelessness of the Defendants, Plaintiffs have suffered severe and serious personal injuries. The full nature and extent of Plaintiffs’ injuries are still unknown and when the same are ascertained, Plaintiffs will assert them with particularity.

26. It was foreseeable to Defendants that, if the heavy, glass disco ball which had been installed to hang from the ceiling directly above seated audience members should become detached or fall, it could cause serious injuries to persons seated directly below the heavy ball.

27. Plaintiffs have been required to engage the services of various medical providers, including obtaining emergency medical attention, both in the United States and in Canada, where they reside, to care for and treat their injuries. Plaintiffs are entitled to reimbursement for past and future medical bills incurred as a result of the injuries that have caused their pain and suffering, as well as lost income.

28. Plaintiffs have, since the incident on February 22, 2013, experienced pain and suffering, and will continue to endure future pain and suffering all to their general damages in an amount in excess of $10,000.00.

29. Plaintiffs have been required to retain the services of a law firm to prosecute this action and are entitled to reasonable attorneys’ fees.

SECOND CAUSE OF ACTION

(NEGLIGENCE via RES IPSA LOQUITUR)

30. Plaintiffs repeat and reallege each and every foregoing paragraph set forth above and incorporate the same by reference as though fully set forth at length herein.

31. The Defendants owed Plaintiffs a duty to exercise due care in providing a safe place for audience members of the Gordie Brown show, and failed to meet this duty, and said actions and omissions as described above, were a breach of the Defendants’ duty of care.

32. Getting hit in the head, hand and fingers by a heavy, glass disco ball while watching a show as an audience member does not ordinarily occur in the absence of someone’s negligence.

33. The Defendants held the exclusive control of the disco ball which fell upon Plaintiffs in the Gordie Brown showroom.

34. Plaintiffs did nothing to cause the disco ball to fall upon them.

35. As a direct and proximate result of the foregoing negligence and carelessness of the Defendants, Plaintiffs have suffered severe and serious personal injuries, and the Defendants are liable for the same under the doctrine of res ipsa loquitur. The full nature and extent of Plaintiffs’ injuries are still unknown and when the same are ascertained with more particularity, Plaintiffs will assert them with particularity.

36. Plaintiffs have been required to engage the services of various medical providers, including emergency medical attention, both in the United States and in Canada, where they reside, to care for and treat their injuries. Plaintiffs are entitled to reimbursement for past and future medical bills incurred as a result of the injuries that have caused their pain and suffering, as well as lost income.

37. Plaintiffs have, since the incident on February 22, 2013, experienced pain and suffering, and will continue to endure future pain and suffering all to their general damages in an amount in excess of $10,000.00.

38. Plaintiffs have been required to retain the services of a law firm to prosecute this action and are entitled to reasonable attorneys’ fees.

THIRD CAUSE OF ACTION

(NEGLIGENCE via STRICT LIABILITY)

39. Plaintiffs repeat and reallege each and every foregoing paragraph set forth above and incorporate the same by reference as though fully set forth at length herein.

40. Inviting audience members and business customers to sit directly beneath a large, heavy and dangerous disco ball, and even more so when the disco ball is not secured with safety cables, was and is an ultrahazardous activity for which the Defendants are strictly liable to any party who suffers any damage as a result of the same, regardless of fault. Plaintiffs did not have any knowledge of the dangers involved when they were seated by an usher employed by the Defendants directly beneath the disco ball.

41. The Plaintiffs, and each of them, were injured and suffered damages, as described above, due to the above-described events when the disco ball fell on them, for which the Defendants, and each of them, are strictly liable to the Plaintiffs, regardless of fault.

42. As a direct and proximate result of the foregoing, Plaintiffs have suffered severe and serious personal injuries, and the Defendants are strictly liable for the same. The full nature and extent of Plaintiffs’ injuries are still unknown and when the same are ascertained with more particularity, Plaintiffs will assert them with particularity.

43. Plaintiffs have been required to engage the services of various medical providers, including obtaining emergency medical attention, both in the United States and in Canada, where they reside, to care for and treat their injuries. Plaintiffs are entitled to reimbursement for past and future medical bills incurred as a result of the injuries that have caused their pain and suffering, as well as lost income.

44. Plaintiffs have, since the incident on February 22, 2013, experienced pain and suffering, and will continue to endure future pain and suffering all to their general damages in an amount in excess of $10,000.00.

45. Plaintiffs have been required to retain the services of a law firm to prosecute this action and are entitled to reasonable attorneys’ fees.

FOURTH CAUSE OF ACTION

(NEGLIGENCE PER SE)

46. Plaintiffs repeat and reallege each and every foregoing paragraph set forth above and incorporate the same by reference as though fully set forth at length herein.

47. The Defendants owed Plaintiffs a duty of care in designing and installing the disco ball at issue herein.

48. The Defendants’ actions were in direct violation of the Nevada Revised Statutes and/or Las Vegas City building codes and/or reasonable and customary construction practices, and, therefore, Defendants’ actions constitute negligence per se.

49. The Nevada Revised Statute and/or Las Vegas City building code provisions at issue were enacted to protect the general public while in structures in the State of Nevada.

50. Plaintiffs are members of the general public and are, therefore, in the class of protected persons intended to be protected by the Nevada Revised Statutes and/or Las Vegas City building codes and/or reasonable and customary construction practices.

51. The injuries sustained by Plaintiff are of the type of injuries the Nevada Revised Statutes and/or Las Vegas City building codes and/or reasonable and customary construction practices were established to protect against.

52. As a direct and proximate result of the foregoing statutory violations and the related negligence and carelessness of the Defendants, for which Defendants are liable under the doctrine of negligence per se, Plaintiffs have suffered severe and serious personal injuries. The full nature and extent of Plaintiffs’ injuries are still unknown and when the same are ascertained with more particularity, Plaintiffs will assert them with particularity.

53. Plaintiffs have been required to engage the services of various medical providers, including obtaining emergency medical attention, both in the United States and in Canada, where they reside, to care for and treat their injuries. Plaintiffs are entitled to reimbursement for past and future medical bills incurred as a result of the injuries that have caused their pain and suffering, as well as lost income.

54. Plaintiffs have, since the incident on February 22, 2013, experienced pain and suffering, and will continue to endure future pain and suffering all to their general damages in an amount in excess of $10,000.00.

55. Plaintiffs have been required to retain the services of a law firm to prosecute this action and are entitled to reasonable attorneys’ fees.

FIFTH CAUSE OF ACTION

(LOSS OF CONSORTIUM)

56. Plaintiffs repeat and reallege each and every foregoing paragraph set forth above and incorporate the same by reference as though fully set forth at length herein.

57. As a direct and proximate result of the injuries caused by the Defendants’ negligence and other actions as described herein, Bridget has suffered and continues to suffer, the loss of the support, maintenance, society, comfort, attention, services, love and affection of her husband, Mark.

58. Before suffering these injuries, Mark was able to and did perform the duties of a husband, including assisting in maintaining the home, and providing love, companionship, affection, society, sexual relations, moral support, and solace to Bridget, including, without limitation, working outside the home to provide financial support for the Bittmans.

59. As a direct and proximate result of the injuries, Mark has been unable to perform the duties of a husband in that he can no longer, for example, provide substantial assistance with housework, and participate in family, recreational, or social activities with Bridget in the same manner as before, and has been severely limited in his ability to contribute to the household income.

60. Due to the nature of the injuries sustained by Mark, and the severe physical and psychological strains and stress they cause him, Mark is no longer able to provide Bridget with love, companionship, affection, sexual relations, society, moral support, and solace to the same degree and in the same manner as before the injuries described herein were sustained.

61. Because of these injuries, upon information and belief, Mark will be unable to perform these duties in the future. Bridget is therefore deprived of and will be permanently deprived of her spouse’s consortium, all to plaintiff’s damage, in an amount in excess of $10,000, but in a total amount to be established by proof at trial.

WHEREFORE, the Plaintiffs, expressly reserving their right to amend their Complaint at the time of the trial of the action herein to include all parties and items of damage not yet ascertained, demand judgment against the Defendants for each cause of action as follows:

A. For general damages in an amount in excess of Ten Thousand Dollars;

B. For special damages in an amount in excess of Ten Thousand Dollars;

C. For lost wages according to proof;

D. For interest at the legal rate;

E. For reasonable attorneys’ fees and costs of suit; and

F. For such other and further relief as the Court may deem just and proper.

G. Mark Albright,

Albright Stoddard Warnick & Albright,

702-384-7111

About the Authors: The law firm of Albright, Stoddard, Warnick & Albright is an A-V Rated Nevada-based full-service law firm having attorneys licensed in Nevada, California and Utah. Our firm’s practice includes a strong emphasis on personal injury accidents. Call us at 888-927-8551.

Note: This article, and any other information you obtain at this website, is not offered as legal advice, nor should it be relied upon as such, nor is it a solicitation for legal services. Only a licensed attorney can advise you with respect to your specific legal needs. We welcome your contacting our firm to discuss such representation. Contacting us does not create an attorney-client relationship. Please do not send any confidential information to us until such time as an attorney-client relationship has been established.