A building should be a shelter, not a source of danger. When objects fall from a structure and injure someone below, it is not merely an unfortunate accident—it is often a preventable failure for which a property owner or manager can be held legally responsible. This area of law, falling under the broader category of premises liability, deals with the duty a property controller has to keep their site reasonably safe for visitors. The core principle is straightforward: if you control a property, you must take reasonable care to prevent foreseeable harm, including harm from above.
Falling object incidents are alarmingly common and can involve a wide range of hazards. These include broken window panes dislodged by faulty frames, signage or siding loosened by wind and poor maintenance, construction materials dropped from scaffolding, ice and snow sliding off a roof, unsecured air conditioning units, and even items knocked from a balcony or window ledge. The consequences are frequently severe, ranging from concussions and lacerations to catastrophic head trauma, spinal injuries, or death. Because the object is often falling from a height, the force of impact is significant, and victims rarely have any warning to protect themselves.
Establishing liability in these cases hinges on proving a few key elements. First, it must be shown that the defendant—whether a landlord, business owner, construction company, or property management firm—was in control of the property where the hazard originated. Control is crucial because it comes with the duty to inspect and maintain. Second, the victim must demonstrate that the falling object was due to a dangerous condition on the property. This condition could be a lack of maintenance, like failing to repair a rotten roof fascia, or an inherently unsafe practice, like improperly securing tools on a construction site.
The most critical legal battle often centers on whether the property controller knew or should have known about the dangerous condition. The law does not expect omniscience, but it does demand reasonable vigilance. A property owner is not liable for a completely unexpected and unforeseeable event. However, they are responsible for hazards that a reasonable inspection would have revealed. For example, if a storm loosened roof tiles, the owner may not have known immediately, but they have a reasonable period to inspect and make repairs after severe weather. If they ignore this duty and a tile later falls, their failure to act can form the basis for liability. Evidence of long-term neglect, like numerous tenant complaints about loose masonry or a history of similar minor incidents, powerfully demonstrates that the owner should have known of the peril.
It is also important to understand that liability can extend beyond the obvious property owner. In cases involving construction, general contractors and subcontractors have a direct duty to secure their work areas and materials. A store tenant leasing space in a mall may share responsibility for the maintenance of their storefront awning. The specific facts of who created the hazard and who had the right to fix it will determine the responsible parties.
For someone injured by a falling object, the path forward involves securing the scene if possible, documenting everything with photographs, obtaining contact information from witnesses, and seeking immediate medical attention. These steps preserve vital evidence that can establish the cause of the fall—such as a visible structural defect—and directly link it to the injuries sustained. The law places a heavy responsibility on those who control property to protect the safety of those rightfully below. When they neglect that duty, and gravity takes over with tragic results, they can and should be held accountable for the profound harm they have allowed to happen.
