According to The Law of Torts (Dan B. Dobbs), the common law rules regarding an entrant's status on the land grew out of an effort to displace the role of the jury. That theory is backed by the circumstances out of which these rules came to be. Over time, those jurisdictions that have maintained the rules have struggled to serve justice, often carving numerous exceptions in order to do so. This article provides a brief overview of the rules and their genesis, and an argument for their abolishment in Connecticut.
Massachusetts became the first U.S. state to adopt the common law rules which base the liability of a possessor of land on the status of the entrant. Sweeny v. Old Colony and Newport Railroad Co., 10 Allen 368 (1865). Twenty years later, Connecticut followed suit in Crogan v. Schiele, 53 Conn. 186 (1885). Citing Sweeny, the Crogan court noted that these rules trace their origin to feudal England, a place and time where owning land carried much prestige.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law are third party online distributors of the broad collection of current and archived versions of ALM's legal news publications. LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law customers are able to access and use ALM's content, including content from the National Law Journal, The American Lawyer, Legaltech News, The New York Law Journal, and Corporate Counsel, as well as other sources of legal information.
For questions call 1-877-256-2472 or contact us at [email protected]