“Premises liability” may sound like lofty legalese, but the term refers to a fairly basic concept: if someone gets injured on your property, you may be held liable – depending on the facts and circumstances.
Many lawsuits that are based in the area of premises liability law focus on such concepts as dangerous property conditions and the status of the person who was on the property; “invitee,” “licensee” or “trespasser”; and the duty owed by the property owner to the person on the property.
Attractive nuisance and premises liability
Some of our readers in Montana may have heard of the attractive nuisance doctrine. This doctrine represents a unique area within premises liability law. In essence, it adds an additional layer of responsibility for property owners, and grants an additional layer of protection for trespassing children.
If property owners have a dangerous condition on their property that might be particularly attractive to children and pose a risk to their safety the landowner may be held responsible if certain precautions were not taken. For example, someone who owns a swimming pool should put up a fence to keep out children who might be tempted to jump in the water unsupervised.
Of course, the facts involved and the perceived danger can make many parts of these cases subjective.
For the most part, if the attractive nuisance doctrine is invoked in premises liability litigation, it is usually done on behalf of younger children who don’t know any better when it comes to the potential danger that a certain property condition might present.
There are many different factors that come into play with this doctrine, such as: whether or not children are likely to trespass in the area where the property condition is located; whether or not the property owner knows about the risk that the property condition presents; and what precautions the property owner has taken to potentially protect young trespassers from the danger of the property condition.