There are many injury claims, settlements and verdicts in personal injury cases with Florida Target Stores. The verdicts and settlements below focus on the amount awarded for pain and suffering. This is the damages component that many people know very little about.
You may have a case if Target’s carelessness causes your injury in Florida. There is a ton of information on this site about Florida slip and fall claims and other types of cases. Here, I focus on Florida Target cases.
Slip and Falls on the Sales Floor
Take pictures of any substance on the floor if you slip and fall at Target. Take a close up (seen above).
Take pictures from further away as well (as seen above).
Slip and Falls near Check Out Areas at Targets Stores in Florida
A customer may slip and fall on a substance near the checkout counter of a Target Store. The customer should take pictures of the substance.
Pictures should be taken from:
- Close up and far away; and
- Multiple angles
Accidents in a Starbucks store inside a Florida Target Store
Many Target Stores in Florida have a Starbucks inside. Starbuck’s carelessness may cause a customer to get injured.
If so, the customer may have an injury case against Starbucks. The most likely claim in this area would be if a person slips on moisture.
This includes water, coffee, lemonade, whip cream or another liquid. Someone may also trip and fall over a mat or object.
Starbucks should inspect its mats to make sure that they have good traction on the bottom.
I have settled many slip and fall cases for people hurt in Florida or on a cruise. The verdicts below against Target are not my cases.
Target Verdicts for Florida Slip, Trip and Falls
Defense verdict in October 2014. Rosa Garcia and her son, Frank Garcia, went to Target Corporations’s store. It is located at 5800 South University Drive in Davie, Broward County, Florida. They were there to have their eyes examined. They were also there for food shopping.
They were there for many hours. It was not raining. She “did not notice it was wet.” While exiting the Target store, she slipped and fell.
Before she fell, Rosa did not see anything on the floor because she said she was walking. Following the fall, she saw that the floor was wet. She also noticed her pants were wet. She said she saw “drops of water [and] water all over.”
She said the water was covering about two or three floor tiles. Frank noticed that the floor was wet after her fall. He saw a puddle where she fell. It was surrounded by water with footsteps.
He noticed a footprint from a Timberland brand boot in the water. He also saw other footprints. He said it looked as if crowds of people had walked in after it was raining. There was a streak.
After the accident, a Target employee wiped the floor. They placed a “caution wet floor” sign there. Target tried to have the case dismissed based on Delgado v. Laundromax, Inc., 65 So.3d 1087 (Fla.Dist.Ct.App.2011). The shopper’s attorney said that Delgado is distinguishable. Her attorney also argued that the footprints in the water create a question of fact as to Target’s constructive notice.
The judge issued an opinion which said:
“In Delgado, the plaintiff, who slipped and fell, initially testified she did not see the substance on which she slipped, but that it looked like water because it was transparent.
There was no evidence in the record that it was raining or that any of the defendant laundromat’s washers or sinks were located near where she fell. Id. at 1090.
Nor were there any additional facts that the spill was on the floor for a long a period of time prior to the accident. Id.
The court noted that the plaintiff testified that she did not know where the water came from, she did not see any water anywhere else other than where she slipped, she did not know how long the water was on the floor, and she did not know of any laundromat employees who knew the water was on the floor. Id.”
The court disagreed with Target that Delgado is the same as the Target case.
The court said that shopper’s son testified that there were “footprints in the water on the floor and that it appeared crowds of people had walked in after it was raining, despite the fact that there is evidence that it was not raining the day Plaintiff fell in the store. These facts raise a genuine issue of material fact as to whether Defendant knew there was water on the floor but ignored it or should have discovered it earlier.”
The customer filed a lawsuit in state court. Target removed the case to federal court.
Target’s attorney was David Cooney of Cooney Trybus. Rosa Garcia v. Target Corporation.
My thoughts: Target usually removes slip and fall cases to Federal Court. Some Florida federal judges are more likely than Florida state court to dismiss a slip and fall case. This is true if it is a case that is tough to prove that Target is negligent.
Florida slip and fall cases may still be won if there is a warning sign in place. Though, they are usually much tougher.
Slip and fall cases are difficult. You can see that from this defense verdict. The shopper’s attorney probably spent $15,000 to $20,000 of his own money on the case. This is in addition to countless hours spent working on the case.
Defense verdict. Marie Corrine Doudeau vs. Target Corporation. Broward County. A shopper slipped and fell on water in a Target store in Hollywood, Broward County, Florida.
The verdict was in October 2014. The date of the accident was in August 2011. The jury found that Target did nothing wrong.
My thoughts: Florida slip and fall cases are difficult.
$230,801.92 Verdict against Target when male shopper allegedly slipped and fell on laundry detergent in a Target store in St. Petersburg, Florida.
The shopper claimed that Target should have posted warnings and cleaned up the spill before the fall occurred. The case is Rodney Sapp v. Target.
My thoughts: The verdict was in 2011, which is after the new slip and fall law passed in Florida, but I am not sure which law was applied because the fall happened in 2008.
The current law requires the shopper/customer to prove that the store (Target) knew or should have known the liquid detergent (or any substance) was on the floor before the shopper fell.
I do not know what the injuries are in this case so I do not know whether the verdict for pain and suffering was similar to the typical settlement values for pain and suffering for injuries caused by someone else in Florida. As seen from this case, you may have a case against Target if you slip and fall on liquid on its floors.
$60,000 verdict for pain and suffering for a shopper who fractured her ankle when she claimed that she slipped on a worn out and wet carpet at Target in Miami, Florida. She argued that Target should have fixed the carpet (a dangerous condition) before her fall.
Target blamed her for not paying attention where she was walking. Her husband made a claim for loss of consortium but the jury did not award him any money. The verdict was in 2010 and the case is Hernandez v. Target.
My thoughts: Though I am not 100% certain, I think the entire verdict was for pain and suffering. If so, this verdict is within the range that I use as a starting point for settlement purposes for pain and suffering for an ankle fracture from an accident in Florida caused by someone else. Many juries award give little, if anything, for a loss of consortium claim if the spouse’s injury is not horrible.
$10,000 verdict for pain and suffering for a 75 year old shopper in Target in Miami-Dade County, Florida who fell down. She broke 2 teeth, tore a shoulder (rotator cuff) and had wrist pain. $5,000 was for past pain and suffering and $5,000 was for future pain and suffering.
My thoughts: The jury awarded her $500 a year for her future pain and suffering. I arrived at this amount by using the life tables, which show her life expectancy to be 10 more years. $5,000 divided by 10 is $500 per year. This verdict for pain and suffering is way below the average settlement for pain and suffering for a torn rotator cuff (shoulder).
You can also check out some settlements and verdicts involving Target’s competitors:
- Walmart settlements for accident cases in Florida
- Costco settlements for injury and accident cases in Florida
Did someone’s carelessness cause your injury in an accident in Florida, or on a cruise or boat?
See Our Settlements
Check out some of the many Florida injury cases that we have settled, including but not limited to car accidents, truck accidents, slip or trip and falls, motorcycle accidents, drunk driving (DUI) accidents, pedestrian accidents, drunk driving accidents, taxi accidents, bicycle accidents, store or supermarket accidents, cruise ship accidents, dog bites, wrongful death and much more.
We want to represent you!
Our Miami law firm represents people anywhere in Florida if someone’s carelessness caused their injuries in car accidents, truck accidents, slip, trip and falls, motorcycle accidents, bike accidents, drunk driving crashes, pedestrian accidents, cruise ship or boat accidents, store or supermarket accidents, wrongful death, accidents at someone else’s home, condo or apartment, accidents involving a Uber or Lyft Driver, and many other types of accidents.
We want to represent you if you were injured in an accident in Florida, on a cruise ship or boat. If you live in Florida but were injured in another state we may also be able to represent you.
Call Us Now!
Call us now at (888) 594-3577 to find out for FREE if we can represent you. We answer calls 24 hours a day, 7 days a week, 365 days a year.