Some of the saddest cases that we have dealt with here at Giarrusso Norton Cooley and McGlone, P.C. are accidents involving children. If your child has been seriously injured or killed on another’s property or while in another’s care, you may wonder what sort of legal recourse you have to help compensate for your family’s suffering. In cases involving accidents on other people’s property, many often assume that if your child did not have permission to be near the hazard that ultimately caused his or her injuries, then the property owner is not responsible. However, that is not always the case.
According the Legal information Institute at Cornell University Law School, the law recognizes that children do not often have the understanding needed to know that certain terrains, machines, or unique property features may pose a risk. Thus, the property owners on which these potential dangers reside have a responsibility to protect children from them. This is known as the attractive nuisance doctrine, and it may offer you a way to hold the owner of the property where your child was injured responsible for his or her accident.
Examples of hazards often cited as being an “attractive nuisance” include:
- Fountains, ponds and swimming pools
- Construction sites and equipment
In many cases, warning signs meant to alert people to the dangers posed by property often aren’t considered to be enough of a safeguard. Locks, fences, walls, and other mechanisms meant to restrict access are typically what are required. An absence of such security measures could be enough for you to pursue a premises liability claim.
You can find more information on pinpointing hazardous property conditions by continuing to explore our site.