Class 15

Duty: Landowners and No Duty Rules

The traditional common law rule held that the owners and occupiers of land owed no obligation of reasonable care to trespassers upon that land, and that they owed only a limited duty toward social guests to warn such guests of known latent hazards. Why would the law recognize a separate category of rules for landowners? And what would be the benefit of grouping entrants into clearly drawn categories?

Some but not all jurisdictions have rejected the common law categories, at least for those who are lawfully on the land. The traditional common law rule often led to outcomes that seemed shocking, at least to many. As important, deciding who fell in each category was time-consuming and complex. But how much of a difference does it make if a state abolishes the common law categories?

Next, we will consider cases in which a third party commits a crime on the defendant’s land. Should defendants ever have a responsibility to prevent such criminal acts? Does it matter if the defendant voluntarily provided some security? If the crime in question could have been anticipated?

This book, and all H2O books, are Creative Commons licensed for sharing and re-use with the exception of certain excerpts. Any excerpts from the Restatements of the Law, Principles of the Law, and the Model Penal Code are copyright by The American Law Institute. Excerpts are reproduced with permission, not as part of a Creative Commons license.