• FreeAdvice has a new Terms of Service and Privacy Policy, effective May 25, 2018.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our Terms of Service and use of cookies.

Trespassing neighbor

Accident - Bankruptcy - Criminal Law / DUI - Business - Consumer - Employment - Family - Immigration - Real Estate - Tax - Traffic - Wills   Please click a topic or scroll down for more.



sandyclaus

Senior Member
Not if it is a natural pond I believe ... ponds are not like pools
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.
 
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.
Cite your source on this information???
 

Ozark_Sophist

Senior Member
Neighbor had this happen .. no suit was possible. Anyone says different is wrong, period.
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.
My wife and I even pay for a higher level of coverage because of our pond.
 

LdiJ

Senior Member
A suit is always possible. Whether it gets anywhere beyond an initial review is another matter but yes, a suit can be filed.
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.
 

Ozark_Sophist

Senior Member
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.
OP stated "private pond," which obviously could be natural or man made.
 

Ohiogal

Queen Bee
Caselaw

Henson v. International Paper Co., 650 S.E.2d 74 (Sup. Ct., S.C., 2007)
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.
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.
 

Find the Right Lawyer for Your Legal Issue!

Fast, Free, and Confidential
data-ad-format="auto">
Top