Case Background
The legal dispute began after an incident on November 28, 2022, at the Imperial House Condominium property in Miami-Dade County, Florida. Vinod Singal, a Virginia resident, visited the premises because her daughter and son-in-law owned a unit in the building. As she attempted to exit through a side door near the lobby, she encountered a transition in the floor level that led to a significant fall.
Cause
Singal alleged that the condominium association maintained a dangerous environment by failing to mark or warn visitors about a "single step". She claimed the design of the step and the landing created a camouflaged effect, making the change in elevation nearly invisible to someone walking toward the exit. Her complaint specifically noted that while other steps on the property featured bright yellow markings to alert pedestrians, this particular step remained unmarked and indistinguishable from the surrounding floor.
Injury
The sudden trip and forward fall resulted in serious physical trauma for Singal. She reported sustaining significant injuries to her shoulder and ribs, along with facial injuries. These conditions caused her extreme physical pain and led to a loss of her general enjoyment of life.
Damages Sought
In her initial filing, Singal sought compensatory damages exceeding $50,000. This request covered her medical expenses, the physical and emotional pain she endured, and compensation for what she described as a permanent disability resulting from the accident.
Key Arguments and Proceedings
The litigation moved through the Eleventh Judicial Circuit Court under Case No. 2023-001453-CA-01. Following the initial complaint filed in January 2023, the parties engaged in a discovery process that culminated in a three-day jury trial in October 2025.
Legal Representation
Plaintiff(s): Vinod Singal
Counsel for Plaintiff(s): Matthew P. Leto | Charles P. Gourlis
Expert for Plaintiff(s): Umasuthan Srikumaran | Brent Wiesel | Ronald F. Zollo
Defendant(s): Imperial House Condominium, Inc.
Counsel for Defendant(s): Brandon G. Waas | Julio Montesino | Kevin Lester Griffis
Experts for Defendant(s): David M. Gill | Rajeev Pandarinath | Joel Harbolt | Stephanie Stahr | Simranpreet Bhumra | Manisha Singal
Key Arguments or Remarks by Counsel
The trial centered on whether the step constituted a "hidden" danger or an "open and obvious" condition that any reasonable person should have noticed.
Claims
The Plaintiff argued that Imperial House Condominium breached its duty of care as a property owner. Singal's legal team contended that as an invitee, she deserved a warning about the camouflaged step. They emphasized that the lack of yellow safety paint which the building used elsewhere proved the association knew how to make steps safe but had neglected this specific area.
Defense
Imperial House Condominium denied all allegations of negligence. Their defense focused on the doctrine of comparative negligence, arguing that Singal had been the primary cause of her own injuries. The defense team asserted that Singal walked in a careless manner and failed to observe a condition that was open and obvious. They argued that the danger was visible enough that she should have realized the risk and avoided the fall through basic personal awareness.
Jury Verdict
On October 8, 2025, the jury returned a verdict entirely in favor of the Defendant, Imperial House Condominium, Inc.
The jury addressed the primary question of whether the Defendant, Imperial House Condominium, had been negligent in a way that legally caused damage to Vinod Singal. After deliberation, the jurors checked the "NO" box on the verdict form.
Because the jury found no negligence on the part of the condominium association, they followed the Court's instructions to stop further deliberations. They did not proceed to calculate any percentage of fault for Singal, nor did they assign any dollar amounts for medical expenses or pain and suffering.
Following the jury's decision, Judge Daryl E. Trawick entered a Final Judgment for the Defendant on November 20, 2025. The Court decreed that Vinod Singal would take nothing from the action and that the case was officially closed as to all parties. The Court reserved jurisdiction only for the purpose of considering future motions regarding legal fees and Court costs.
