Friday, October 10, 2014

Taylor v. Olsen case brief summary

Taylor v. Olsen case brief summary

F: While P, Taylor is traveling down a dark and windy road, she strikes a splintered tree, which had shortly before fallen across the roadway.
This roadway is said to have had a car travel past this particular spot about once every 2 minutes.
TC ruled in favor of D

Concerning People who are outside of land

I: Is the owner or possessor of the tree required to pay such close attention to her roadside trees with a reasonable care to prevent an unreasonable risk of harm?
Distinction btw artificial and natural condition

R: GR: WRT most conditions on land that arise in the state of nature, most courts have held that there is no duty upon the landholder to protect persons outside the premises. (but there is one exception, that is tree)

More people pass by, higher standard of duty of care.
He owns full duty of care to inspect.
Usually, there is distinction btw rural and urban, but here no distinction

A: Requiring an owner to inspect every roadside tree on an area of land such as the one present in this case would make property ownership an untenable burden. There is insufficient evidence to prove that the D did not exercise reasonable care of the tree in question.

C: affirmed

No comments:

Post a Comment

Search Thousands of Case Briefs and Articles.