Hacker News Reader

Comment by CubsFan1060 | Hacker News Reader

In Norway, if you tripped and broke your ankle on the landowners land, could you sue them?

Cannot speak for this exact scenario, but generally in western and northern Europe (the only places I am familiar enough with) there doesn’t exist the culture of suing that the US has gained a reputation for - deserved or not.

Could you sue them in the US? Let's say you asked and got permission, "can we trek through your forest", first.

In the west, there's a 'duty of care', in which you must keep your facilities reasonably safe, but typically the prerequisite is EITHER (A) implicitly inviting people onto your property or (B) specifically inviting people onto your property (via advertisement, word of mouth, etc). If this duty of care is breached and someone suffers injury because of that, the property owner can be sued for damages like medical expenses.

Scenario B is the most common scenario in that you shouldn't have to be worried about stepping on nails or tripping over things if you go to your local ikea.

Scenario A is more state-by-state, but at least in my state (Georgia), you can "imply invite" people onto your property for something as small as having an opening in a fence on your land, or a beaten pathway that seems to be frequented by dirt bikes - this is why 'no trespassing' signs are commonplace, so that you know that the property owner does not invite you onto their land and thus any injuries are at your own expense.

Great question! The real answer is "you can always sue anyone for anything, but you may not win".

But, since this is about Wyoming, let's see...

https://law.justia.com/codes/wyoming/2016/title-34/chapter-1...

As a non-lawyer, I'd say they have no liability. As a landowner, I'd never personally chance it, but I would see if I could give a 6' portion of the land to the state/federal government.

Yes

Not unless you tripped due to a tripwire set by the landowner, or similar edge cases like that.

That's part of the problem in the US. Hunter tripped on a branch? That's a lawsuit!

There are virtually zero situations where a landowner is liable for the injury of trespassers in the middle of nowhere.

I don't agree with "exactly zero", but it's frequently overstated and the "tripped on a branch" situation is definitely not a concern.

However, "attractive nuisance" has gone pretty far, at least here in California.

edit: I think the parent commenter edited their comment, but I'll leave mine as-is.

I didn't edit the comment. You read it how you wanted to.

No need to be rude, I just thought "exactly zero" was a quote when you apparently wrote "virtually zero".

How was your parent poster rude? The poster seemed simply to be stating a fact.

It's not rude for me say it's not me, it's you.

Except that is not true, at all. You’d like it to be, logically, but if a trespasser (even if they are not aware they are) trips off a poorly maintained trail or an old rock wall, or etc … the landowner will be in court.

If it can happen when a thief breaks into your house and breaks his leg.. it can happen in the woods.

Of course: depending on state, etc.

In the case I'm thinking of, where it's a large tract of vacant unimproved land, thats not true at all. There are no trails or rock walls to speak of. There's no house. It's just land. If you can find a case where this happened I'd love to read about it.

The idea that someone in the US walking along basically unmaintained paths in the woods that may be on private property will routinely sue somebody if they trip and break a bone is a trope that really needs to die. It's just idiocy and doesn't even fall in the man bites dog category but more in the man bites mountain lion category.

People who live in rural and semi-rural areas in the US are mostly pretty chill in general with people respectfully using their property, especially at the edges, in my experience.

> If it can happen when a thief breaks into your house and breaks his leg.. it can happen in the woods.

This is a non-sequetor and is most cettainly false.

A house is hypothetically meant to be safe, woods are not - you could be eaten by a bear.

I don’t think you could in general in the US either. If you grant someone easement you might have a duty to do basic things like not make concealed traps that could hurt them. Fear of litigation is just another excuse to keep land private.

Why bother when the healthcare is already free?

I would think universal healthcare would take the wind out of the sails of a lot of injury lawsuits.

no idea why this is downvoted

It happens sometimes and I try and mostly succeed not to get too worried about it.

But this is definitely one of my pet theories as to the litigiousness of America - healthcare is exceptionally expensive and in theory someone gets stuck with the bill, so when someone (especially someone without insurance) gets injured the game begins.

I saw it personally on an uninsured friend who's arm bones were broken into pieces by a car wreck through no fault of his own. He was put back together pretty well, but to the tune of tens of thousands of dollars.

There are other reasons to sue for injury, but it would be nice to think that they aren't so the injured person is able to escape bankruptcy from medical debt.

Yeah it seems like, it doesn't automatically solve all problems, but the comment made no such grand claims. I don't see how "take the wind out of a lot of injury suits" is even controversial.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com