How Does a Warning Sign Affect a Construction Injury Claim?

In some states, a “Construction Zone Keep Out” or other such warning sign is a complete defense to an injury claim. However, in California, assumption of the risk is normally a partial defense, at best.

Overall, assumption of the risk is a voluntary assumption of a known risk. A car crash is a good example of how this defense does NOT work. Most people voluntarily get into most cars. However, in most cases, a car crash is a theoretical or possible risk, not a known risk. If a property owner posted a warning sign, that sign makes these elements easier to prove. However, the insurance company must still prove some important points. More on that below.

So, if you were hurt in a construction accident, Construction Accident Lawyers can still obtain maximum compensation. This compensation usually includes money for economic losses, such as medical bills, and noneconomic losses, such as pain and suffering.

Elements of the Warning Sign Defense

You never know when law and pop culture might collide. This clip from Spongebob Squarepants illustrates the three basic elements of the warning sign defense. Loyal viewers may remember that this tragic incident arose from a game of tag that went way off the rails.

Seeing the Sign

In this clip, Patrick definitely saw the sign as he galloped toward serious injury. The sign would’ve been more effective further away from the precipice of the cliff, but that point is neither here nor there for the purposes of this post.
This element of the warning sign defense is occasionally straightforward in construction accident claims. Owners routinely place warning signs around construction zones. However, owners usually only post signs in walkways. Victims who take shortcuts across property could easily miss such signs.

Additionally, some people, especially older people, have vision issues. They might see the sign, but cannot read it. More on that below.

The “I didn’t see the sign” response is often more effective in dog bite and other such cases. A sign on the outside of the back fence doesn’t help a victim who enters the yard through the back door of the house.

Reading the Sign

Patrick couldn’t read the sign because he’s not exactly the sharpest knife in the drawer. This issue often comes up in the real world, but not because the victim is unintelligent (or at least that’s usually not the reason).

Many people in Southern California don’t speak English well. 20 percent of Californians speak English “less than very well,” according to the Office of the Attorney General. The closer to the border you get, the higher this percentage climbs.

Most native English speakers couldn’t interpret a phrase like “zona de construcción mantenerse alejado.” Likewise, most native Spanish speakers cannot read “Construction Zone Keep Out.”

Once again, the victim’s age may come into play as well, but this time, from the other end of the timeline. Many youngsters cannot read three-syllable words. We see this issue a lot. A construction zone is an attractive nuisance that draws curious children.

Understanding the Sign

Reading the sign is closely related to understanding the sign. Since Patrick couldn’t read the sign, we can only speculate as to whether he could understand what the sign meant. But based on his background, our money is of no comprendre.

LEP (limited English proficiency) victims may be able to read a warning sign, but they often don’t understand the nature of the warning. The same thing applies to small children who can barely read the sign to begin with.

A graphic illustration approved by the American National Standards Institute (ANSI) is a reading and understanding shortcut. People may be unable to read and understand the words, but as a matter of law, they can read and understand a graphic warning.

Effect of the Defense

An insurance company lawyer may do all this work for nothing. As mentioned, assumption of the risk is usually a partial defense in California.

Based on all evidence presented, especially warning sign defense evidence, jurors must divide responsibility between the owner and victim on a percentage basis. If Patrick’s case went to Bikini Bottom Superior Court, a jury would probably consider the warning sign’s improper placement as well as the owner’s inability to convincingly prove all elements of the warning sign defense.

Such considerations are vitally important in the Golden State. California is a pure comparative fault state. Even if the victim was 99 percent responsible for an injury, the owner is still responsible for a proportionate share of damages.

A warning sign is not a get-out-of-jail-free card. For a free consultation with experienced California Construction Accident Attorneys, contact the Law Offices of Eslamboly Hakim. We do not charge upfront legal fees in these matters.

Credit: Photo by Midjourney