Premises: Difference between revisions
Content deleted Content added
Abigailgem (talk | contribs) →See also: Add Occupiers' liability |
Abigailgem (talk | contribs) Delete section on premises liability- see talk page ~~~~ |
||
| Line 5: | Line 5: | ||
In this sense, the word is always used in the plural, but singular in construction. Note that a single house or a single other piece of property is "premises", not a "premise", although the word "premises" is plural in form; e.g. "The equipment is located on the customer's premises", never "The equipment is located on the customer's premise". |
In this sense, the word is always used in the plural, but singular in construction. Note that a single house or a single other piece of property is "premises", not a "premise", although the word "premises" is plural in form; e.g. "The equipment is located on the customer's premises", never "The equipment is located on the customer's premise". |
||
== |
==premises liability== |
||
'''Premises liability''' is the liability for a landowner for certain [[tort]]s that occur on the [[real property]]. This can range from things from "injuries caused by a variety of hazardous conditions, including open excavations, uneven pavement, standing water, crumbling curbs, wet floors, uncleared snow, icy walks, falling objects, inadequate security, insufficient lighting, concealed holes, improperly secured mats, or defects in chairs or benches".<ref name="Premises Liability and Slip & Fall">[http://www.aeelaw.com/practice-areas/new-york-city-premise-liability-lawyers Premises Liability and Slip and Fall]. Retrieved June 27, 2011.</ref> In sum: |
|||
{{quote|Premises liability law is the body of law which makes the person who is in possession of land or premises responsible for certain injuries suffered by persons who are present on the premises.|ExpertLaw website<ref name=expert />}} |
|||
For premises liability to apply: |
|||
# The defendant must possess the land or "premises".<ref name=expert>[http://www.expertlaw.com/library/premises_liability/premises_liability.html ExpertLaw website]. Retrieved January 12, 2009.</ref> |
|||
# The plaintiff must be an [[invitee]] or, in certain cases, a [[licensee]].<ref name=expert /><ref name=law>[http://www.locate-personal-injury-lawyer.com/Articles/premises-liability.asp Article on premises liability]. Retrieved January 12, 2009.</ref> Traditionally, [[trespass]]ers were not protected under premises liability law.<ref name=expert /><ref name=law /> However, in 1968, the California Supreme Court issued a vastly influential opinion, entitled Rowland v. Christian (1968) 69 Cal.2d 108, which abolished the significance of legal distinctions such as invitee, licensee, or trespasser in determining whether one could hold the possessor of a premises liable for harm. This opinion led to changes in the law in many other states in the United States, and is viewed as a seminal opinion in the development of the law of premises liability. |
|||
# There must be [[negligence]] or some other wrongful act.<ref name=law /> In recent years, the law of premises liability has evolved to include cases where a person is injured on the premises of another by a third person's wrongful act, such as an assault. These cases are sometimes referred to as "third party premises liability" cases and they represent a highly complex and dynamic area of tort law. They pose especially complex legal issues of duty and causation because the injured party is seeking to hold a possessor or owner of property directly or vicariously liable when the immediate injury-producing act was, arguably, not caused by the possessor or owner. |
|||
See [[Duty of care#Land]] |
|||
===Lai Chau v. Southstar Equity Limited Co. and Brookside Properties Inc.=== |
|||
Lai Chau, a former [[University of South Florida]] student, survived a violent [[Kidnapping|abduction]] in her North [[Tampa]] apartment complex in 2001. Two men sneaked past the complex’s security gate, and shot the 20-year-old student three times in the head. The landmark [[negligent security]] case won Chau $15.7 million in damages in 2004.<ref>Nguyen, Dong-Phuong. "Carjack Victim Begins 2002 At Home." St. Petersburg Times 1 Jan. 2002 http://www.sptimes.com/2002/01/01/TampaBay/Carjack_victim_begins.shtml</ref> |
|||
Fred Zinober, who helped represent Chau, said "it never would have happened to Lai Chau," had the property owners not allowed negligent security at The Remington complex. |
|||
"We really believe that people will pay an additional $12 or $13 (per month) to be safe," Zinober remarked of security upgrades during the trial.<ref>Fechter, Michael. "Jury Gives $10 Million More in Security Suit." Tampa Tribune 17 Dec. 2004 http://www.tampalawfirm.com/?pageid=141&rowid=181</ref> |
|||
=== Morales v. Lia === |
|||
''Morales v. Lia''<ref name=Morales>''Morales v. Lia'', 238 A.D.2d 786, 656 N.Y.S.2d 458 (3rd Dep't 1997).</ref> is the leading modern case in [[New York]] law. A pedestrian who was hit by a car in the [[parking lot]] of a [[strip mall]] was unable to sue the [[defendant]] mall owner, because the driver and owner of the vehicle were 100% liable for [[plaintiff]]'s injuries.<ref name=Morales /> |
|||
==Premises registration== |
==Premises registration== |
||
Revision as of 09:03, 12 October 2013
Look up premises in Wiktionary, the free dictionary.
Premises are land and buildings together considered as a property. This usage arose from property owners finding the word in their title deeds, where it originally correctly meant "the aforementioned; what this document is about", from Latin prae-missus = "placed before".
In this sense, the word is always used in the plural, but singular in construction. Note that a single house or a single other piece of property is "premises", not a "premise", although the word "premises" is plural in form; e.g. "The equipment is located on the customer's premises", never "The equipment is located on the customer's premise".
premises liability
Premises registration
Premises registration is "a way to locate where livestock or dead animals are kept or congregated."[1] In the United States, it is voluntary according to the USDA, but may be mandatory for each state.[1]
As of January 13, 2009 the USDA has entered into the federal register a document which provides for the expansion of implementation of a mandatory national animal identification system to be effective January 2010. Citizens may go here [1] to enter their comments and concerns about the expected effects of such limitations imposed by this action.
References
- ^ a b State of Wisconsin website Livestock Premises Registration page. Retrieved January 12, 2009.