Knowledge (XXG)

Rowland v. Christian

Source 📝

28: 238:
depending upon such matters, and to focus upon the status of the injured party as a trespasser, licensee, or invitee in order to determine the question whether the landowner has a duty of care, is contrary to our modern social mores and humanitarian values. The common law rules obscure rather than illuminate the proper considerations which should govern determination of the question of duty.
222:, which explained that common law distinctions between an invitee, licensee, and trespasser traditionally determined the duty of care owed by a possessor of land to a plaintiff. A duty of care to warn about the dangerous condition of an area is owed to invitees and licensees under the distinctions but not to trespassers. 225:
The majority considered the classifications to be an unhelpful shortcut to determine negligence, and that a general duty of care should be owed to all visitors to land. The summary judgment for the defendant was reversed because the defendant should have warned the plaintiff of the broken handle.
237:
A man's life or limb does not become less worthy of protection by the law nor a loss less worthy of compensation under the law because he has come upon the land of another without permission or with permission but without a business purpose. Reasonable people do not ordinarily vary their conduct
193:
The plaintiff, James Davis Rowland, Jr., was a guest in the apartment of the defendant, Nancy Christian. The plaintiff requested to use the bathroom and a water faucet handle broke off in his hand, leaving him with severed tendons and nerve damage.
246:
had inspired appellate courts in at least nine other U.S. states and the District of Columbia to completely abandon the traditional distinctions between invitees, licensees, and trespassers, while 14 other U.S. states were persuaded by
267:
concurred. Burke argued that the majority had unnecessarily thrown away centuries of clear precedent for a future of "potentially unlimited liability." He felt that such a dramatic change in the law should come from the legislature.
299: 658: 1143: 1339: 412: 1085: 791: 916: 863: 1291: 1375: 583: 1198: 784: 508: 638: 1010: 1136: 555: 405: 1370: 576: 1054: 999: 770: 1365: 736: 398: 1318: 1047: 722: 470: 1311: 1205: 311: 1177: 909: 923: 743: 1170: 870: 197:
The defendant had complained to the landlord about the broken handle but did not warn the plaintiff. The trial judge granted
1250: 1103: 677: 1380: 1241: 944: 524: 166: 33: 185:
owed by a possessor of land to the people on the land. It replaced the classifications with a general duty of care.
992: 729: 1212: 895: 856: 477: 1332: 1127: 829: 1261: 1033: 421: 649: 569: 373: 1270: 1163: 809: 539: 355: 364: 951: 754: 121: 1184: 985: 822: 813: 603: 562: 264: 101: 51:
James David Rowland, Jr., Plaintiff and Appellant, v. Nancy Christian, Defendant and Respondent.
1154: 1040: 886: 882: 847: 798: 763: 715: 463: 449: 307: 215: 105: 1325: 1302: 1284: 1277: 1118: 1019: 930: 902: 836: 777: 708: 621: 610: 594: 535: 517: 497: 488: 219: 198: 91: 1219: 978: 969: 958: 937: 456: 440: 109: 382: 1191: 1026: 631: 260: 117: 1359: 157: 61: 699: 182: 113: 75: 690: 669: 178: 162: 1069: 390: 174: 78:
to any visitor, even if the visitor is trespassing. Trial court reversed.
334:
Hall v. Cagle, 773 So. 2d 928, 932 (Miss. 2000) (McRae, J., concurring).
436: 170: 263:
wrote a dissenting opinion in which fellow conservative Justice
394: 27: 300:"The Hegemony of the Reasonable Person in Anglo-American Law" 659:
Redbox Automated Retail LLC v. Universal City Studios LLLP
1144:
Indiana Harbor Belt Railroad Co. v. American Cyanamid Co.
351:, 69 Cal. 2d 108, 443 P.2d 561 (1968) is available from: 201:
on behalf of the defendant, and the plaintiff appealed.
1340:
State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Co. v. Campbell
1086:
Spur Industries, Inc. v. Del E. Webb Development Co.
1301: 1260: 1240: 1233: 1153: 1126: 1117: 1095: 1077: 1068: 1009: 968: 880: 846: 808: 792:
Tarasoff v. Regents of the University of California
753: 698: 689: 668: 648: 620: 593: 534: 507: 487: 435: 428: 306:. Oxford: Oxford University Press. pp. 45–80. 140: 136:
Peters, joined by Traynor, Tobriner, Mosk, Sullivan
132: 127: 97: 87: 82: 68: 56: 46: 41: 20: 288:Aspen Publishers, New York, NY: 2007. p. 223-227 917:Seong Sil Kim v. New York City Transit Authority 864:Farwell v. Boston & Worcester Railroad Corp. 235: 584:Sioux City & Pacific Railroad Co. v. Stout 304:Oxford Studies in Private Law Theory: Volume 1 229:The most "rhetorically powerful passage" from 406: 302:. In Miller, Paul B.; Oberdiek, John (eds.). 8: 1199:Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals Inc. v. Thompson 785:Schloendorff v. Society of New York Hospital 509:intentional infliction of emotional distress 1292:American Motorcycle Ass'n v. Superior Court 1137:Alwin v. State Farm Fire & Casualty Co. 639:Zacchini v. Scripps-Howard Broadcasting Co. 251:to modify and simplify those distinctions. 1237: 1123: 1074: 1011:Negligent infliction of emotional distress 695: 432: 413: 399: 391: 17: 556:CompuServe Inc. v. Cyber Promotions, Inc. 74:An occupant of a property owes a general 577:United Zinc & Chemical Co. v. Britt 277: 1055:Molien v. Kaiser Foundation Hospitals 1000:Gross v. FBL Financial Services, Inc. 771:Union Pacific Railway Co. v. Botsford 7: 1376:Supreme Court of California case law 737:Palsgraf v. Long Island Railroad Co. 1048:Miller v. National Broadcasting Co. 723:Jablonski by Pahls v. United States 471:Picard v. Barry Pontiac-Buick, Inc. 286:The Torts Process, Seventh Edition. 1312:BMW of North America, Inc. v. Gore 169:. It eliminated the categories of 14: 1319:Liebeck v. McDonald's Restaurants 1206:Geier v. American Honda Motor Co. 1178:Friend v. Childs Dining Hall Co. 910:United States v. GlaxoSmithKline 26: 924:United States v. Johnson (1987) 744:Mexicali Rose v. Superior Court 1371:1968 in United States case law 1171:Sindell v. Abbott Laboratories 871:Vance v. Ball State University 1: 1251:Walt Disney World Co. v. Wood 1104:Boomer v. Atlantic Cement Co. 678:United States defamation law 1366:United States tort case law 1242:Joint and several liability 945:Yount v. City of Sacramento 525:Hustler Magazine v. Falwell 298:Simons, Kenneth B. (2020). 167:Supreme Court of California 34:Supreme Court of California 1397: 993:Ultramares Corp. v. Touche 730:Kerans v. Porter Paint Co. 1213:Chysky v. Drake Bros. Co. 896:Boub v. Township of Wayne 857:Albro v. Agawam Canal Co. 478:Sheridan v. United States 73: 25: 1333:Honda Motor Co. v. Oberg 1128:Ultrahazardous activity 830:Hitaffer v. Argonne Co. 144:Burke, joined by McComb 1262:Comparative negligence 1034:Archibald v. Braverman 422:United States tort law 240: 42:Decided August 8, 1968 650:Tortious interference 570:Intel Corp. v. Hamidi 1271:Li v. Yellow Cab Co. 1164:Thomas v. Winchester 549:Rowland v. Christian 540:Trespass to chattels 349:Rowland v. Christian 152:Rowland v. Christian 21:Rowland v. Christian 952:Pearson v. Callahan 755:Medical malpractice 122:Raymond L. Sullivan 1381:1968 in California 1185:Loop v. Litchfield 986:Ybarra v. Spangard 881:Public Authority, 823:Cahoon v. Cummings 814:Loss of consortium 624:, Publicity rights 604:Haslem v. Lockwood 563:Dougherty v. Stepp 284:Henderson et al. 265:Marshall F. McComb 255:Dissenting opinion 102:Marshall F. McComb 98:Associate Justices 1353: 1352: 1349: 1348: 1229: 1228: 1155:Product liability 1113: 1112: 1064: 1063: 1041:Thing v. La Chusa 887:Negligence per se 848:Common employment 799:Scott v. Bradford 764:Landeros v. Flood 716:Trimarco v. Klein 685: 684: 464:Vosburg v. Putney 450:Garratt v. Dailey 429:Intentional Torts 216:Raymond E. Peters 181:to determine the 148: 147: 106:Raymond E. Peters 1388: 1326:Pearson v. Chung 1303:Punitive damages 1285:Hoffman v. Jones 1278:Knight v. Jewett 1238: 1124: 1119:Strict liability 1075: 1020:Krouse v. Graham 931:Martin v. Herzog 903:Briscoe v. LaHue 837:Werling v. Sandy 778:Mohr v. Williams 709:Brown v. Kendall 696: 611:Popov v. Hayashi 536:Trespass to land 518:Snyder v. Phelps 498:Hartman v. Moore 489:Abuse of process 433: 415: 408: 401: 392: 387: 381: 378: 372: 369: 363: 360: 354: 335: 332: 326: 324: 322: 320: 295: 289: 282: 220:majority opinion 210:Majority opinion 199:summary judgment 160: 92:Roger J. Traynor 83:Court membership 64: 30: 29: 18: 1396: 1395: 1391: 1390: 1389: 1387: 1386: 1385: 1356: 1355: 1354: 1345: 1297: 1256: 1225: 1220:Devlin v. Smith 1149: 1109: 1091: 1060: 1005: 979:Summers v. Tice 964: 959:Saucier v. Katz 938:Tedla v. Ellman 876: 842: 804: 749: 681: 664: 644: 616: 589: 530: 503: 483: 457:Katko v. Briney 424: 419: 385: 379: 376: 370: 367: 361: 358: 352: 344: 339: 338: 333: 329: 318: 316: 314: 297: 296: 292: 283: 279: 274: 257: 233:is as follows: 212: 207: 191: 165:decided by the 156: 110:Mathew Tobriner 60: 37: 12: 11: 5: 1394: 1392: 1384: 1383: 1378: 1373: 1368: 1358: 1357: 1351: 1350: 1347: 1346: 1344: 1343: 1336: 1329: 1322: 1315: 1307: 1305: 1299: 1298: 1296: 1295: 1288: 1281: 1274: 1266: 1264: 1258: 1257: 1255: 1254: 1246: 1244: 1235: 1231: 1230: 1227: 1226: 1224: 1223: 1216: 1209: 1202: 1195: 1192:Losee v. Clute 1188: 1181: 1174: 1167: 1159: 1157: 1151: 1150: 1148: 1147: 1140: 1132: 1130: 1121: 1115: 1114: 1111: 1110: 1108: 1107: 1099: 1097: 1093: 1092: 1090: 1089: 1081: 1079: 1072: 1066: 1065: 1062: 1061: 1059: 1058: 1051: 1044: 1037: 1030: 1027:Dillon v. Legg 1023: 1015: 1013: 1007: 1006: 1004: 1003: 996: 989: 982: 974: 972: 966: 965: 963: 962: 955: 948: 941: 934: 927: 920: 913: 906: 899: 891: 889: 883:Fireman's rule 878: 877: 875: 874: 867: 860: 852: 850: 844: 843: 841: 840: 833: 826: 818: 816: 810:Wrongful death 806: 805: 803: 802: 795: 788: 781: 774: 767: 759: 757: 751: 750: 748: 747: 740: 733: 726: 719: 712: 704: 702: 693: 687: 686: 683: 682: 674: 672: 666: 665: 663: 662: 654: 652: 646: 645: 643: 642: 635: 632:Taus v. Loftus 627: 625: 618: 617: 615: 614: 607: 599: 597: 591: 590: 588: 587: 580: 573: 566: 559: 552: 544: 542: 532: 531: 529: 528: 521: 513: 511: 505: 504: 502: 501: 493: 491: 485: 484: 482: 481: 474: 467: 460: 453: 445: 443: 430: 426: 425: 420: 418: 417: 410: 403: 395: 389: 388: 365:Google Scholar 343: 342:External links 340: 337: 336: 327: 312: 290: 276: 275: 273: 270: 261:Louis H. Burke 256: 253: 211: 208: 206: 203: 190: 187: 161:(1968), was a 158:69 Cal. 2d 108 146: 145: 142: 138: 137: 134: 130: 129: 125: 124: 118:Louis H. Burke 99: 95: 94: 89: 85: 84: 80: 79: 71: 70: 66: 65: 62:69 Cal. 2d 108 58: 54: 53: 48: 47:Full case name 44: 43: 39: 38: 31: 23: 22: 13: 10: 9: 6: 4: 3: 2: 1393: 1382: 1379: 1377: 1374: 1372: 1369: 1367: 1364: 1363: 1361: 1342: 1341: 1337: 1335: 1334: 1330: 1328: 1327: 1323: 1321: 1320: 1316: 1314: 1313: 1309: 1308: 1306: 1304: 1300: 1294: 1293: 1289: 1287: 1286: 1282: 1280: 1279: 1275: 1273: 1272: 1268: 1267: 1265: 1263: 1259: 1253: 1252: 1248: 1247: 1245: 1243: 1239: 1236: 1232: 1222: 1221: 1217: 1215: 1214: 1210: 1208: 1207: 1203: 1201: 1200: 1196: 1194: 1193: 1189: 1187: 1186: 1182: 1180: 1179: 1175: 1173: 1172: 1168: 1166: 1165: 1161: 1160: 1158: 1156: 1152: 1146: 1145: 1141: 1139: 1138: 1134: 1133: 1131: 1129: 1125: 1122: 1120: 1116: 1106: 1105: 1101: 1100: 1098: 1094: 1088: 1087: 1083: 1082: 1080: 1076: 1073: 1071: 1067: 1057: 1056: 1052: 1050: 1049: 1045: 1043: 1042: 1038: 1036: 1035: 1031: 1029: 1028: 1024: 1022: 1021: 1017: 1016: 1014: 1012: 1008: 1002: 1001: 997: 995: 994: 990: 988: 987: 983: 981: 980: 976: 975: 973: 971: 967: 961: 960: 956: 954: 953: 949: 947: 946: 942: 940: 939: 935: 933: 932: 928: 926: 925: 921: 919: 918: 914: 912: 911: 907: 905: 904: 900: 898: 897: 893: 892: 890: 888: 884: 879: 873: 872: 868: 866: 865: 861: 859: 858: 854: 853: 851: 849: 845: 839: 838: 834: 832: 831: 827: 825: 824: 820: 819: 817: 815: 811: 807: 801: 800: 796: 794: 793: 789: 787: 786: 782: 780: 779: 775: 773: 772: 768: 766: 765: 761: 760: 758: 756: 752: 746: 745: 741: 739: 738: 734: 732: 731: 727: 725: 724: 720: 718: 717: 713: 711: 710: 706: 705: 703: 701: 697: 694: 692: 688: 680: 679: 673: 671: 667: 661: 660: 656: 655: 653: 651: 647: 641: 640: 636: 634: 633: 629: 628: 626: 623: 619: 613: 612: 608: 606: 605: 601: 600: 598: 596: 592: 586: 585: 581: 579: 578: 574: 572: 571: 567: 565: 564: 560: 558: 557: 553: 551: 550: 546: 545: 543: 541: 537: 533: 527: 526: 522: 520: 519: 515: 514: 512: 510: 506: 500: 499: 495: 494: 492: 490: 486: 480: 479: 475: 473: 472: 468: 466: 465: 461: 459: 458: 454: 452: 451: 447: 446: 444: 442: 438: 434: 431: 427: 423: 416: 411: 409: 404: 402: 397: 396: 393: 384: 375: 366: 357: 356:CourtListener 350: 346: 345: 341: 331: 328: 315: 313:9780198851356 309: 305: 301: 294: 291: 287: 281: 278: 271: 269: 266: 262: 254: 252: 250: 245: 239: 234: 232: 227: 223: 221: 217: 209: 204: 202: 200: 195: 188: 186: 184: 180: 176: 172: 168: 164: 159: 154: 153: 143: 139: 135: 131: 128:Case opinions 126: 123: 119: 115: 111: 107: 103: 100: 96: 93: 90: 88:Chief Justice 86: 81: 77: 72: 67: 63: 59: 55: 52: 49: 45: 40: 36: 35: 24: 19: 16: 1338: 1331: 1324: 1317: 1310: 1290: 1283: 1276: 1269: 1249: 1218: 1211: 1204: 1197: 1190: 1183: 1176: 1169: 1162: 1142: 1135: 1102: 1084: 1053: 1046: 1039: 1032: 1025: 1018: 998: 991: 984: 977: 957: 950: 943: 936: 929: 922: 915: 908: 901: 894: 869: 862: 855: 835: 828: 821: 797: 790: 783: 776: 769: 762: 742: 735: 728: 721: 714: 707: 700:Duty of care 675: 657: 637: 630: 609: 602: 582: 575: 568: 561: 554: 548: 547: 523: 516: 496: 476: 469: 462: 455: 448: 348: 330: 325:(At p. 49.) 317:. Retrieved 303: 293: 285: 280: 258: 248: 243: 242:As of 2000, 241: 236: 230: 228: 224: 213: 196: 192: 183:duty of care 151: 150: 149: 114:Stanley Mosk 76:duty of care 50: 32: 15: 319:December 3, 57:Citation(s) 1360:Categories 691:Negligence 670:Defamation 595:Conversion 272:References 218:wrote the 189:Background 179:trespasser 970:Causation 1070:Nuisance 347:Text of 259:Justice 214:Justice 205:Decision 175:licensee 133:Majority 1234:Damages 1096:Private 622:Privacy 441:Battery 437:Assault 249:Rowland 244:Rowland 231:Rowland 171:invitee 141:Dissent 69:Holding 1078:Public 538:& 439:& 386:  383:Leagle 380:  377:  374:Justia 371:  368:  362:  359:  353:  310:  177:, and 676:See 321:2023 308:ISBN 163:case 1362:: 885:, 812:, 173:, 155:, 120:, 116:, 112:, 108:, 104:, 414:e 407:t 400:v 323:.

Index

Supreme Court of California
69 Cal. 2d 108
duty of care
Roger J. Traynor
Marshall F. McComb
Raymond E. Peters
Mathew Tobriner
Stanley Mosk
Louis H. Burke
Raymond L. Sullivan
69 Cal. 2d 108
case
Supreme Court of California
invitee
licensee
trespasser
duty of care
summary judgment
Raymond E. Peters
majority opinion
Louis H. Burke
Marshall F. McComb
"The Hegemony of the Reasonable Person in Anglo-American Law"
ISBN
9780198851356
CourtListener
Google Scholar
Justia
Leagle
v

Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.