If Adam trips in the automobile dealership, which of the following is true about the possible claims?

The option indicating that Adam can claim against the dealership's liability insurance is accurate due to the principles of premises liability. When a customer, such as Adam, is injured on a business's property due to the business's negligence—whether that is failing to maintain safe conditions or not adequately addressing hazards—there is a valid basis for a claim against the business's liability insurance. This type of insurance is designed to cover situations where a third party is injured while on the insured property.

Business owners have a duty to provide a safe environment for customers. If Adam tripped due to a condition that the dealership should have known about and rectified, the dealership's liability insurance would typically cover any legitimate claims for damages, including medical expenses resulting from the injury.

The other choices present situations that do not accurately reflect the roles and responsibilities inherent in this context. For instance, the dealership itself cannot file a claim for Adam's medical expenses since it is Adam, as the injured party, who has the rights to seek damages. Additionally, the assertion that insurance cannot cover the incident is incorrect because liability insurance is explicitly intended to cover such claims. Lastly, the notion that Adam must pay for all his injuries does not hold, as he has the right to seek compensation from a