Supreme
Court of
319
Prosser,
p. 69-70
Facts:
The
defendant failed to remove a post as agreed, and the plaintiff ran into it on
his mower and died. The trial court
dismissed the claim on the basis that it was a negligence claim rather than a
trespass claim. The plaintiff appealed.
Issue:
If you
leave an object lying around on someone else’s property and they get hurt, can
you be held liable for trespass?
Rule:
The Restatement
says that “trespass by continued presence” may lie if consent of some object’s
presence has been terminated.
Analysis: The court uses the
Restatement’s rule to find that the facts fit the tort of trespass, for which
governmental immunity does not apply.
Conclusion:
The court
reversed the verdict and remanded for further proceedings.
Notes
and Questions
1. There may be
trespass if you either enter a property under false pretenses or sort of “wear
out your welcome” by doing something the property owner doesn’t approve of.
2. You need not
enter the land illegally to be found guilty of trespass, but you must be found
to have failed to leave after given notice that you were no longer welcome.
3. On the one
hand, we don’t want to intrude upon the private use of private property, but on
the other hand, we don’t want to unnecessarily undercut community connections
by forcing people to be extra wary when guests in other people’s homes.
4.
A. Again, when
you commit an intentional tort, you are responsible for any damages, even those
that you couldn’t have foreseen.
B. This somewhat
expands the boundaries of one’s property as far as carriers go.
C. Again, watch
out when you commit an intentional tort!
You could be liable for anything and everything that follows!
5. Some people must
open their facilities to the public without discrimination.
A. So all places
of public accommodation must accept people without discrimination.
B. If you own
lots and lots of property, it may effectively become public property. In some jurisdictions, free speech may be
exercised on private property.