Subsequent Repairs to the Sidewalk: Are they Admissible Evidence?

Subsequent Repairs to the Sidewalk: Are they Admissible Evidence?

As a Los Angeles accident lawyer, I’ve written extensively on the topic of Los Angeles sidewalks.

Just last week, the City of LA announced a plan to try and tackle this issue.  If it’s approved, the plan will place future sidewalk repairs on homeowners.

An issue that comes up in many Los Angeles sidewalk cases is when repairs are made to the sidewalk after someone tripped and got hurt.

Are repairs made to the sidewalk admissible evidence in your Los Angeles sidewalk trip and fall case?

The California Evidence Code treats this issue as a “subsequent remedial measure.”

A subsequent remedial measure is inadmissible to show negligence or culpable conduct.

In other words, a plaintiff cannot use a subsequent repair to the sidewalk to imply that the City is liable just because it fixed the sidewalk.

If liability could be imposed in this situation, nobody would ever repair the sidewalk for fear that the repair could be used against them.

A subsequent repair can be used to show ownership and control of the sidewalk.  For example, a plaintiff can show that the property belongs to the City if the City repaired it.

Los Angeles sidewalk cases involve many complex issues.  You can read more about what to expect from your Los Angeles sidewalk case here.

If you were hurt as a result of a dangerous Los Angeles sidewalk, call the Rabbi Lawyer without delay!