If you suffer an injury on someone else’s property in Indiana, the property owner may attempt to avoid liability by asserting the “open and obvious” defense. This legal strategy could directly impact your ability to recover damages, so understanding how it works—and when it doesn’t—is essential.
What qualifies as an open and obvious hazard?
Under Indiana premises liability law, property owners may not be held responsible for injuries caused by dangers that are “open and obvious.” In essence, if a reasonably attentive person would have seen and avoided the hazard, the owner may not owe a duty of care. Obvious examples include well-lit spills surrounded by warning cones or large obstructions in plain view. The court considers whether an ordinary person would have recognized the risk and acted accordingly.
When the defense may not apply
The open and obvious defense is not absolute. A property owner may still be liable if the hazardous condition was not readily visible or if the injured party lacked a clear line of sight. Poor lighting, visual obstructions, or subtle dangers—such as uneven flooring that blends into the surroundings—can reduce the strength of this defense. Courts assess the specific context: Was the hazard visible? Were warnings provided? Was the danger reasonably foreseeable?
Challenging the defense with evidence
You can weaken or overcome the open and obvious defense by providing evidence that the hazard wasn’t readily apparent. Document the area immediately, noting lighting conditions, visibility, and any signage—or lack thereof. Photographs, video, and witness statements can all reinforce your personal injury claim and demonstrate that you exercised reasonable caution under the circumstances.
Indiana applies a modified comparative negligence system. Even if the defense doesn’t entirely bar recovery, your damages may be reduced if you’re partially at fault. For instance, if a court finds you 25% responsible, your total award decreases by that percentage.
