EASYTIGER
Posts: 7676
Joined: 12/7/2001
From: nyc,
NY, USA
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: STLPilot
Here is a case where a 13 year old was killed. At first trial it was dismissed due to the fact the person was trespassing. It went to the court of appeals and was later reversed due to the fact that the chain was unmarked and that that a reasonable person could conclude that an unmarked chain under these circumstances would be likely to cause serious injury or death to such trespassers.
LINK
So I don't know the exact outcome of this case, but it was reversed in appellate court and this is the first one that I look for and found. I'll try to find the final hearing, but either way that guy is going to spend a lot of money to fight his case, hope he has good liability insurance. One thing that did not help this case is the fact that after the accident happened he decided to hang blaze orange surveyor's ribbon to the chain, that sure didn't help his case much.
It was reversed for:
1. The chain at issue in this case was dangerous under the circumstances.
2. There is evidence in the record that suggests that the chain was unmarked, difficult to see,
3. A reasonable person could conclude that an unmarked chain under these circumstances would be likely to cause serious injury or death to such trespassers.
4. The evidence is in dispute as to whether the appellee exercised reasonable care to adequately warn trespassers of the allegedly dangerous condition. I.E. a sign was not erected.
So once again, if you think you can have a chain across your road and unmarked, sorry but you're once again, WRONG.
Very, very interesting link, thanks for that one.
Shows why we have courts and lawyers and such. What was the guy thinking when he hung the chain up? He had attempted to confront the motorcyclist earlier...was his intent just to keep them off his property, or was he upset because not only was he trespassing, but he IGNORED him? Who knows?
But lord knows the whole thing would probably never have happened if the guy had painted the the chain bright orange and marked it properly...the court said there were broken reflectors and rusted off paint, the original person who put up the barrier was wise enough to understand the need for visibility.
I'd bet if you read the TEXAS law, you will find it's very similar to the WV laws cited...it's NOT "you are are my property, you are trespassing, I can shoot you or whatever, tough luck!" That's MYTH. Whether they accept it or not, Texas is NOT the Republic of Texas, it's just another State in the USA, one of fifty, and the laws of the land supercede the laws of the state. Deal with it!
The intent of the chain erector(!) seems to count for a lot, if you just want to mess up some bikers who have been ruining your field, you may be in big trouble when one of them gets hurt. If you were just trying to protect your property and were totally unaware of creating a hazard, a court will probably see it quite differently.
But now that all of you have read this article by DB, you are aware of the potential danger to people, and you have an obligation to remedy your fences, you can't plead ignorance if somebody gets hurt.
|
Printable Version
All Forums >> RC Airplanes >> AMA Discussions >> RE: Very interesting article by Dave Brown... 
RE: Very interesting article by Dave Brown... - 
