- Icy Hypo - with nature, not responsible for injuries” “dealing - doesn’t tell them what the danger is - even if you warned of icy floors, they would go in and look for a tree, they would not be thinking about the icy floors - Watermelons in the Grocery Aisle Hypo - woman fell over watermelons on the floor in the store - invitee, business customer - D should have anticipated she would be looking for other stuff - Duty question - she can’t recover unless the stuff had been on the floor long enough to give them actual notice or constructive notice (breach) - if it’s an open and obvious danger, she and gets nothing - if it falls into an exception, she recovers and that recovery is reduced by her negligence (CF defense) Duty to Persons Off the Land 1. Original Distinction - Natural condition on the property - no duty - natural condition - mud-slide, did you cause it? - condition on the property - duty Artificial - aligns with the duty to children rule 2. Natural: Urban-Rural - Natural condition in an urban area - duty - LLS, branch hits a car, duty - breach is a different issue 3. Abolition of the Categories - CA, some other states - You owe a duty of reasonable care to off the property - effect is essentially it gets the breach question to the jury - in rural areas, you’re less likely to get a breach - foreseeability is down, less people, you’d have to inspect and maintain to prevent injuries from natural conditions - in areas, more foreseeable risks Firefighters Rule - CL had trouble dealing with firefighters - not trespassers (they have a right) - not invitees, no business purposes (haven’t always invited them)
- Icy Hypo - “dealing with nature, not responsible for injuries” - doesn’t tell them what the danger is - even if you warned of icy floors, they would go in and look for a tree, they would not be thinking about the icy floors - Watermelons in the Grocery Aisle Hypo - woman fell over watermelons on the floor in the store - invitee, business customer - D should have anticipated she would be looking for other stuff - Duty question - she can’t recover unless the stuff had been on the floor long enough to give them actual notice or constructive notice (breach) - if it’s an open and obvious danger, she and gets nothing - if it falls into an exception, she recovers and that recovery is reduced by her negligence (CF defense) Duty to Persons Off the Land 1. Original Distinction - Natural condition on the property - no duty - natural condition - mud-slide, did you cause it? - Artificial condition on the property - duty - aligns with the duty to children rule 2. Natural: Urban-Rural - Natural condition in an urban area - duty - LLS, branch hits a car, duty - breach is a different issue 3. Abolition of the Categories - CA, some other states - You owe a duty of reasonable care to off the property - effect is essentially it gets the breach question to the jury - in rural areas, you’re less likely to get a breach - foreseeability is down, less people, you’d have to inspect and maintain to prevent injuries from natural conditions - in areas, more foreseeable risks Firefighters Rule - CL had trouble dealing with firefighters - not trespassers (they have a right) - not invitees, no business purposes (haven’t always invited them)