landowner liability (or not)?

[cavew0man]

Here's a question just purely out of interest. Today I saw a couple of very obviously non-cave-certified divers get chased out of a cave by someone who spotted them and knew they shouldn't have been in there. This is in Mexico, at a site where there is mixed cavern and cave and also just general tours and snorkelers, so pretty busy place, and the entrance doesn't check qualifications, they generally leave it to the guides. Of course, not everyone comes in with a guide.

My question is this - in the US, what is the liability situation for the landowners who generously provide access to the caves? I've never been there, so don't know what sort of entrance controls and such are in place, but some twit must be able to sneak through a fence and do something silly if they really put their mind to it.

 

[SuPrBuGmAn]

Varies state to state and whether or not the divers have permission and whether or not they pay if permission is given.

 

[Charlie99]

Whether or not the landowner has a liability, he can ALWAYS be sued.

Defending a lawsuit can be costly, even if its a frivolous lawsuit, or one which the landowner will win because of waivers.

The path of least resistance for a landowner is to prohibit any diving, thereby avoiding any possibility of accidents and potential lawsuits. Sad, but that's life in the USA.

 

[driftwood]

Here's a question just purely out of interest. Today I saw a couple of very obviously non-cave-certified divers get chased out of a cave by someone who spotted them and knew they shouldn't have been in there. This is in Mexico, at a site where there is mixed cavern and cave and also just general tours and snorkelers, so pretty busy place, and the entrance doesn't check qualifications, they generally leave it to the guides. Of course, not everyone comes in with a guide.

My question is this - in the US, what is the liability situation for the landowners who generously provide access to the caves? I've never been there, so don't know what sort of entrance controls and such are in place, but some twit must be able to sneak through a fence and do something silly if they really put their mind to it.

As a general rule, the landowner is always responsible for any damages to people on his/her property REGARDLESS OF PERMISSION TO ENTER. That is why I always prosecute all trespassers to the fullest extent allowed by law. At best, you will be charged and convicted receiving a $1000 fine and up to a year in jail. At worst, spend a couple of years in state prison. If someone gets hurt, they may collect damages from my insurance carrier, but they will face criminal charges.

 

[driftwood]

Whether or not the landowner has a liability, he can ALWAYS be sued.

Defending a lawsuit can be costly, even if its a frivolous lawsuit, or one which the landowner will win because of waivers.

The path of least resistance for a landowner is to prohibit any diving, thereby avoiding any possibility of accidents and potential lawsuits. Sad, but that's life in the USA.

There a lot of caves in Texas for divers to enjoy, but the liability of allowing access to them is just too great.

 

[HullBlister]

In Wisconsin we have laws that cover an "attractive nuisance" like private swimming pools, ponds, quarries and such.

Basically it limits the liability to the owner to zilch if someone comes on their property without permission and gets hurt. The exception to this is if the owner is charging for the activity.

In the case where the landowner does give permission, their liability is limited to gross negligence (like he said nothing about the breeding of freshwater great white sharks with lasers on their heads he was doing in the quarry), and usually capped at actual costs.

Blister

 

[cavew0man]

In the case where the landowner does give permission, their liability is limited to gross negligence (like he said nothing about the breeding of freshwater great white sharks with lasers on their heads he was doing in the quarry), and usually capped at actual costs.

Blister

Frickin' sharks with frickin' laser beams....

So overall, it sounds like for the most part the risk is too high. The evolution of our lawsuit-crazy society is grounds for a whole different discussion...

But anyhow, so the accessible caves are on public lands and parks then?

 

[ReefHound]

Potential liability is impossible to determine precisely because situations vary and the law (or should I say it's people component) is so dynamic. I would say that nobody knows better how to assess liability than insurance companies. If an insurer requires you to do certain things (install fence, check id, sign waivers, etc.) then it's because these things are imperative in reducing the risk of liability.

 

[rjack321]

Many states have laws which absolve landowners of anything but gross negligance if they allow people onto their lands for recreational purposes (cave diving or say fishing) without compensation. Last time time I lived there (1991) FL was one such state (with alot of divable caves too). If the landowner is charging $$ for access the standard of care is higher.

 

[Gombessa]

Many states have laws which absolve landowners of anything but gross negligance if they allow people onto their lands for recreational purposes (cave diving or say fishing) without compensation. Last time time I lived there (1991) FL was one such state (with alot of divable caves too). If the landowner is charging $$ for access the standard of care is higher.

Yep, it does vary state to state. Grossly simplified, at common law, a property owner owes a low duty of care to trespassers (but it is rarely "no duty of care"). Persons you give permission to enter your land (this typically includes guests in a home, and I imagine "free access" caves may fall into this category) are called licensees, and a property holder owes a higher duty of care, for instance, a duty to warn of concealed hazards that the property holder knows about. A person invited onto land for a business purpose is an "invitee" on the land, and a property holder owes to invitees the highest duty of care, among other things a duty to warn of hidden dangers, and to actively inspect the premises and discover/fix unknown dangers.

In Wisconsin we have laws that cover an "attractive nuisance" like private swimming pools, ponds, quarries and such.

I remember attractive nuisance as only applying to small children; if this is the case, it probably doesn't fit in a cave diving scenario.