Wet Floor Accidents in Florida: Proving Negligence After HB 837

Wet floor accidents seem straightforward at first: water on the floor, someone slips, someone gets hurt. But in Florida, the law governing these cases is more demanding than many people expect — and if you or your attorney do not understand exactly what you need to prove, a legitimate injury claim can fail.

Florida Statute §768.0755 sets a high evidentiary bar for slip-and-fall cases involving transitory foreign substances. Understanding that standard — and what you must establish to meet it — is essential if you were hurt on a wet floor in Florida.

What the Statute Requires

Florida Statute §768.0755, enacted in 2010, sets the standard plaintiffs must meet in transitory foreign substance cases: to succeed on a slip-and-fall claim involving such a hazard, you must show that the business had actual or constructive knowledge of the dangerous condition and failed to act.

This is not a trivial requirement. It places the burden squarely on the injured person to affirmatively demonstrate the business’s awareness — actual or constructive — before the fall. Simply showing that you fell on a wet floor, without evidence connecting the hazard to the business’s knowledge, is not sufficient.

Actual Knowledge: What It Means

• Actual knowledge: means the property owner or an employee directly knew the hazard existed before you fell. Examples include:

An employee created the hazard — for example, mopped the floor and did not post a warning sign

A customer reported a spill to an employee who did not respond

A manager was told about a leaking refrigeration unit and took no action

A store associate was seen walking around the spill without addressing it

Actual knowledge is relatively straightforward to prove when the evidence exists — particularly through witness testimony or surveillance footage showing an employee near the hazard before the fall.

Constructive Knowledge: The Harder Fight

• Constructive knowledge: is where most wet floor cases are won or lost. It means the owner did not have direct awareness of the hazard, but the hazard existed long enough — or was recurring enough — that they should have known about it through the exercise of reasonable care.

Florida courts recognize two primary pathways to establishing constructive knowledge:

1. Duration of the condition — The hazard existed for a sufficient length of time that a reasonable inspection would have discovered it. A spill with dried edges, discoloration, or shoe scuff marks through it suggests the substance had been there long enough that someone should have found it.

2. Regular recurrence — The condition regularly occurs in a predictable location, such that the owner should have a protocol in place to address it. A produce section that routinely puddles from overhead misters, or a self-serve drink station where spills are a near-daily occurrence, may create constructive knowledge because the hazard is foreseeable.

Why Surveillance Video Is Now More Critical Than Ever

Under the current standard, the duration of a hazardous condition is often central to the case. The most reliable way to prove duration — or to prove that employees were near the hazard and failed to respond — is surveillance footage.

Most commercial properties have video systems covering their floors. The challenge is that this footage is typically overwritten on a rolling basis, often within 24 to 72 hours. Once it is gone, it is gone.

Your attorney can send a litigation hold letter (also called a spoliation letter) to the property owner immediately after your accident, demanding that all relevant surveillance footage be preserved. If the owner destroys footage after receiving that notice, it can give rise to an adverse inference — a legal principle that allows a jury to presume the destroyed evidence was unfavorable to the owner.

Do not wait to contact an attorney. Every hour matters when surveillance footage is at stake.

Other Evidence That Supports Constructive Knowledge

Beyond video, the following evidence is highly relevant to constructive knowledge arguments:

• Cleaning and inspection logs: Most commercial properties keep records of floor inspections and cleaning schedules. A gap in the log before your fall is powerful.
• Maintenance requests and complaint records: Prior complaints about the same hazard or location show the owner was on notice.
• Employee testimony: Coworkers of employees who were on duty at the time of your accident may have relevant knowledge.
• Expert testimony: In complex cases, a premises liability expert can testify about industry-standard inspection protocols and whether the property met them.

What to Do at the Scene

If you slip on a wet floor, the actions you take immediately after your fall can make or break your case:

1. Do not leave without reporting the incident. Ask to speak with a manager and request that an incident report be completed. Get a copy. 2. Photograph everything. The puddle, the area around it, the state of the floor, and the absence — or presence — of wet floor signs. 3. Note the time and location precisely. The more specific you can be about where and when the fall occurred, the easier it is to identify the right surveillance camera footage. 4. Collect witness information. Anyone who saw the fall or was in the area beforehand may have relevant observations. 5. Seek medical care promptly. Same-day treatment links your injuries to the fall and prevents insurers from arguing the gap. 6. Preserve your clothing and shoes. The footwear you had on is evidence. Store it in a bag without washing it. 7. Do not post about the accident on social media. Photos or statements you post can be used against you.

The Statute of Limitations

Florida’s statute of limitations for negligence claims is two years from the date of the accident, under HB 837 (the 2023 tort reform law that reduced the prior four-year period). Act promptly — do not let deadlines slip while you are focused on recovering.

Contact HLM Injury Lawyers — Free Consultation

At HLM Injury Lawyers, Eric A. Hernandez understands the evidentiary demands that Florida’s current slip-and-fall law places on injured victims. He is a former Assistant U.S. Attorney for the Southern District of Florida and former law clerk to Florida Supreme Court Chief Justice Charles T. Wells, with more than 25 years of trial experience. He serves clients throughout Coral Springs, Parkland, Coconut Creek, Margate, Tamarac, Pompano Beach, and Broward County.

If you were hurt on a wet floor, call (305) 842-2100 for a free consultation. No fee unless we recover for you.

HLM Injury Lawyers 3301 N. University Dr., Suite 100 Coral Springs, FL 33065 (305) 842-2100