jumperjim@gmail
Junior Member
South Carolina
If a person drowns in a private pond while trespassing is the owner responsible?
If a person drowns in a private pond while trespassing is the owner responsible?
Sadly enough, in this day and age of the litigious society, it IS possible that you could be held responsible.South Carolina
If a person drowns in a private pond while trespassing is the owner responsible?
Please stop answering when you have no clue.Not if it is a natural pond I believe ... ponds are not like pools
Cite your source on this information???Please stop answering when you have no clue.
There is every possibility that the "attractive nuisance doctrine" may apply. It all depends on the circumstances, i.e., where this pond was located, the age of the trespasser, what the owner had done to discourage or warn off trespassers in the past, among other things.
Not if it is a natural pond I believe ... ponds are not like pools
I'm sure you know how to use Google yourself. Look it up like I did.Cite your source on this information???
No, you are wrong. You made a blanket statement without the facts in this situation based on one anecdotal second hand experience. A suit is always possible.Neighbor had this happen .. no suit was possible. Anyone says different is wrong, period.
Do you know why this is true??? Because the law did not want Ted Kennedy to be liable.A suit is always possible.
A suit is always possible. Whether it gets anywhere beyond an initial review is another matter but yes, a suit can be filed.Neighbor had this happen .. no suit was possible. Anyone says different is wrong, period.
I do agree a bit however that there is a difference between a natural pond/river/lake/stream and something man made. One really cannot make the "attractive nuisance" argument when its a natural body of water.A suit is always possible. Whether it gets anywhere beyond an initial review is another matter but yes, a suit can be filed.
OP stated "private pond," which obviously could be natural or man made.I do agree a bit however that there is a difference between a natural pond/river/lake/stream and something man made. One really cannot make the "attractive nuisance" argument when its a natural body of water.
We may never know....OP stated "private pond," which obviously could be natural or man made.
Which is why trolls like you should not post erroneous information.We may never know....
And the actual definition of an attractive nuisance is NOT a naturally occurring body of water. However there could be other reasons why an individual could be sued in this situation.Description South Carolina high court held that the owner of a canal where a ten-year old fell in and drowned, was not liable for negligence under the attractive nuisance doctrine as the boy was old enough to understand the danger, especially since he could not swim.