Talk:Licensee
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Law, an attempt at providing a comprehensive, standardised, pan-jurisdictional and up-to-date resource for the legal field and the subjects encompassed by it. | |
| ??? | This article has not yet received a quality rating on the assessment scale. | |
| ??? | This article has not yet received an importance assessment on the assessment scale. | |
I'm not sure but I believe there are specific laws that only apply in some states that prohibit policemen and firemen from recovering for injuries sustained on the job. While Workers Comp might have similar provisions, I don't know if that is available in every state. Sorry I don't have time to research this myself.
[edit] I think a lot of this is wrong
First, the status of the visitor as trespasser, invitee, and licensee has been overturned, at least in some states. Rowland v. Christian (1968 in California) pretty much did away with using these categories as determinative of the duty of care, at least in California. Other states have followed suit to a large extent. A good source on this is "Tort Stories" by Rabin and Sugarman, although I don't have time to fix this. However, I believe that the status of the visitor may often have some impact on the duty of care - it's just that cases like Rowland said that they are not completely determinative.
Second, I'm pretty sure that even in the old way of doing things, the highest duty of care was given to licensees, not invitees. I am pretty sure that social guests, for example, don't have to be warned of noticeable defects. Even in terms of hidden defects, it's unclear. The Restatement Second of Torts in 1965 provided for a broad definition of hidden defects, but for example, CA at the time of Rowland hadn't adopted it, and it had a very narrow definition of hidden defects (a typical example being a loaded spring gun).
Third, trespassers have often been given more rights than one might think the laws would provide. Often landowners can be found liable for trespassers hurting themselves in some jurisdictions, with other jurisdictions not wanting to allow people to collect damages arising from wrongful action in the first place.
This article should be fully deleted or cleaned up.
Borntostorm 20:15, 19 March 2007 (UTC)
