July 9, 2026 | Personal Injury
What a South Carolina Slip and Fall Attorney Wants You to Know About Act 42 in 2026
Key Takeaways: South Carolina’s Act 42 changed slip and fall cases arising or accruing after January 1, 2026, by allowing defendants to seek fault allocation to certain nondefendant tortfeasors. A defendant found less than 50% at fault may pay only its percentage share, complicating full recovery when multiple parties share responsibility. The law imposes a 180-day disclosure deadline and preserves exceptions for willful, wanton, reckless, or intentional conduct, as well as conduct involving illegal drug use, sale, or possession. These changes make early investigation, evidence preservation, and identifying all potentially responsible parties critical from the claim’s start.
South Carolina slip and fall cases entered a new legal landscape on January 1, 2026. That is when Act 42 amended Section 15-38-15 and made fault allocation rules more complicated. The store, landlord, property manager, maintenance contractor, or another involved party may now try to shift blame to someone not yet a defendant in the lawsuit.
That procedural change can affect recovery strategy from the start. In premises liability claims, the central dispute is often who created the hazard, who knew about it, and who had the duty to fix or warn about it. Under SC fault apportionment 2026 rules, those questions may become broader and more contested earlier in litigation.
Why Act 42 Is a Major Shift in South Carolina Premises Liability Cases
Act 42 changed the rules for causes of action or claims arising or accruing after January 1, 2026. The amended statute applies prospectively, meaning older cases are governed by the prior framework, while newer incidents follow the revised South Carolina Contribution Among Tortfeasors Act.
The 2026 amendment permits fault allocation to certain nondefendant tortfeasors. A defendant may argue that someone not currently in the case actually caused part of the dangerous condition. That is why Act 42 slip and fall litigation may involve more aggressive investigation into maintenance logs, lease obligations, cleaning contracts, vendor records, and incident reporting chains.
A Columbia Slip and Fall Scenario That Shows What Could Change
Imagine a woman in Columbia slips on a puddle in a grocery store entrance and suffers a fractured hip. Initially, the claim may appear straightforward against the store.
Under Act 42, the defense may try to widen the field of blame. The store may contend that a janitorial contractor failed to place mats, that a maintenance vendor did not address a drainage issue, or that another entity controlled the entrance. If the defense properly discloses a nondefendant tortfeasor SC argument within the statutory deadline, the plaintiff may need to evaluate whether to add another party.
That does not mean the injured person loses the claim. It does mean the case may become more evidence-driven and time-sensitive. A Columbia premises liability lawyer may need to identify all potentially responsible actors early, before records disappear and before defense narratives harden.
How the New Fault-Splitting Rule Works
Amended Section 15-38-15(A) provides that a defendant found less than 50% at fault is liable only for that percentage of indivisible damages. If one defendant is assigned less than half the total fault, that defendant generally is not jointly and severally liable for the full verdict. This is one of the biggest consequences of premises liability tort reform for injured plaintiffs.
A defendant can still be jointly and severally liable if found 50% or more at fault. Full collection may depend on whether one defendant crosses that threshold, especially if other responsible actors are insolvent, absent, or hard to pursue. For additional background, Jeffcoat’s discussion of joint and several liability in South Carolina provides useful context.
The amended statute preserves important exceptions. Defendants whose conduct is willful, wanton, reckless, or intentional remain outside the limitation’s protection. The amended version also excludes conduct involving illegal or illicit drug use, sale, or possession.
The 180-Day Disclosure Deadline Matters
Act 42 requires disclosure of the nondefendant tortfeasor within 180 days of the action’s commencement, unless the court allows later disclosure for good cause. The plaintiff may then add that tortfeasor as a party defendant, and the amended pleading relates back to the commencement of the action.
That procedural deadline shapes case strategy in the first months after filing. Early case management has real consequences in an SC injury claim fault splitting dispute.
The Defense Still Has a Burden of Proof
A defendant who blames a nondefendant tortfeasor generally bears the burden of proving that person’s fault was a proximate cause of the plaintiff’s injuries. Unless the plaintiff amends pleadings to add the tortfeasor, the defense carries that burden under Section 15-38-15(G)(2).
That burden may help limit speculative blame arguments. A defendant still needs evidence tying the alleged nonparty conduct to the unsafe condition and resulting injury, documents, testimony, surveillance footage, inspection records, or repair histories rather than bare assertion.
Not Every Nonparty Can Be Put on the Verdict Form
Section 15-38-15(H) excludes certain categories of nondefendant tortfeasors from the verdict form, including some immune or unavailable parties, some cases involving willful, wanton, reckless, or intentional conduct by the nondefendant tortfeasor, some strict liability matters, asbestos-related claims, and certain governmental actions.
The statute uses a structured verdict process. The jury first decides damages and the plaintiff’s comparative fault, then upon a defendant’s motion, a separate verdict allocates fault percentages among defendants and qualifying tortfeasors. This differs from the older framework discussed in this South Carolina Law Review article.
What This Could Mean for Injured People in Columbia
For plaintiffs, the biggest risk is more blame spread across more actors. If one defendant is pushed below 50%, that defendant may argue it owes only its several share of damages. That creates collection problems if another responsible party is not sued, cannot be found, lacks coverage, or contests fault.
Early investigation may be even more important in a South Carolina slip and fall claim after January 1, 2026. Identifying who owned, leased, maintained, cleaned, and controlled the accident location may influence both liability and collectability. A South Carolina slip and fall attorney will focus not just on the hazard but on the chain of responsibility behind it.
The new law does not change the need to prove basic negligence elements. An injured person must still show duty, breach, causation, and damages. What Act 42 changes is how fault may be apportioned once multiple responsible persons or entities are involved.
Practical Steps After a Slip and Fall in 2026
If you were hurt in a fall, acting quickly may help protect your position. Delay can make it harder to identify witnesses, preserve surveillance footage, obtain cleaning logs, and determine which entities controlled the area.
Several practical steps may help:
- Report the fall promptly and ask that an incident report be created.
- Seek medical care quickly to document the injury, symptoms, and mechanism.
- Photograph the hazard and surroundings if possible, including lighting, flooring, warning signs, and weather conditions.
- Preserve witness names and keep receipts, discharge papers, and follow-up instructions.
- Avoid giving casual recorded statements before understanding injury extent and fault issues.
- Track deadlines carefully because South Carolina provides a three-year statute of limitations under Section 15-3-530(5).
People looking for broader guidance can review these personal injury resources.
Where Plaintiffs May Need to Be Especially Careful
Act 42 may create more pressure to identify every viable defendant early. In premises cases, responsibility may be divided among a property owner, commercial tenant, maintenance company, security contractor, or another entity with operational control. Missing one can complicate recovery if the remaining defendant argues someone else deserves substantial fault share.
Insurance and corporate structure issues may also matter more. A business may operate through multiple related entities, and contracts may divide maintenance duties in non-obvious ways. A South Carolina slip and fall attorney may need to investigate these relationships promptly.
Why the Effective Date Can Decide the Entire Framework
The incident date determines which version of the law applies. Act 42 applies only to causes of action or claims arising or accruing after January 1, 2026. If a fall happened before that date, the older rules may control.
Legal analysis in these cases is fact-sensitive. A case filed in 2026 does not automatically fall under Act 42 if the injury happened in 2025. The controlling date is generally when the cause of action arose or accrued, not the filing date.
How Does This Impact Me?
If I slipped and fell in early 2026, does Act 42 apply to my case?
It may, depending on when your cause of action arose or accrued. If the incident happened on or after January 1, 2026, Act 42 may govern fault-allocation rules. If the fall happened before that date, the prior version may apply.
Can a business blame someone who is not part of my lawsuit?
Under certain circumstances, yes. Act 42 allows fault allocation to certain nondefendant tortfeasors if procedural requirements are met, including the 180-day disclosure rule. The defense must prove the nondefendant’s conduct was a proximate cause, and some nonparty categories are excluded.
What should I do if I think multiple companies were involved in the property where I fell?
Preserve as much information as possible right away. Photographs, witness names, incident reports, medical records, and property communication help identify who controlled the area and may share responsibility. Early investigation prevents being surprised later by a non-party tortfeasor SC defense.
Why This 2026 Change Deserves Close Attention
Act 42 is not just a technical statutory amendment. For injured people in Columbia, it may affect who needs investigation, who should be named in the lawsuit, how fault is argued at trial, and how collectible a verdict may be. SC fault apportionment 2026 has real consequences for everyday slip and fall claims.
For plaintiffs, the lesson is simple: build the case early and carefully. When fault splitting enters the picture, missing evidence or parties becomes more costly. Anyone dealing with a serious fall injury should understand that outcomes depend on specific facts, applicable statutory timing, and available proof.
