• 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.

Private Development/Community SPEEDING

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

Lovet1

Junior Member
What is the name of your state?]What is the name of your state? Pennsylvania
I live in a private development. The development owner is building more new homes. Recently a new family purchased a home at the bottom of the hill. The speed limit is 20mph which I think is still to fast. These new homeowners haven't even moved in yet. They drive through this development at at least 30-40 mph. They are an Italian family at least 4 families moving in to one home. None of them will SLOW DOWN... There are many children, they almost hit me already backing out of drive. Many residents including myself have told them nicely and not so nicely. We also informed the land owner. If a child or anyone gets hurt or killed is the development owner liable, he was told about this and does NOTHING. cAN SOMEONE PLEASE ADVISE ME WHAT TO DO BEFORE A CHILD GETS SERIOUSLY HURT. cAN i CALL ST. POLICE??
 


S

seniorjudge

Guest
Lovet1 said:
What is the name of your state?]What is the name of your state? Pennsylvania
I live in a private development. The development owner is building more new homes. Recently a new family purchased a home at the bottom of the hill. The speed limit is 20mph which I think is still to fast. These new homeowners haven't even moved in yet. They drive through this development at at least 30-40 mph. They are an Italian family at least 4 families moving in to one home. None of them will SLOW DOWN... There are many children, they almost hit me already backing out of drive. Many residents including myself have told them nicely and not so nicely. We also informed the land owner. If a child or anyone gets hurt or killed is the development owner liable, he was told about this and does NOTHING. cAN SOMEONE PLEASE ADVISE ME WHAT TO DO BEFORE A CHILD GETS SERIOUSLY HURT. cAN i CALL ST. POLICE??
Q: If a child or anyone gets hurt or killed is the development owner liable, he was told about this and does NOTHING.

A: No, not unless the development owner kills or hurts someone himself. He cannot be held liable for someone else's criminal actions.

Call the cops.
 

JETX

Senior Member
seniorjudge said:
Q: If a child or anyone gets hurt or killed is the development owner liable, he was told about this and does NOTHING.

A: No, not unless the development owner kills or hurts someone himself. He cannot be held liable for someone else's criminal actions.
Sorry, but that may not be true. If a person is injured and the damaged party can show the injury was a result of the development owners NEGLIGENCE in enforcing the private associations laws, they COULD be liable in a civil action.

call the cops.
The 'cops' have no jurisdiction to enforce traffic laws on private property.
 
S

seniorjudge

Guest
JETX said:
Sorry, but that may not be true. If a person is injured and the damaged party can show the injury was a result of the development owners NEGLIGENCE in enforcing the private associations laws, they COULD be liable in a civil action.


The 'cops' have no jurisdiction to enforce traffic laws on private property.
Do you have a case or statute from any jurisdiction showing that the owner of a servient easement is liable for the actions of a third party?

The 'cops' have no jurisdiction to enforce traffic laws on private property.

Some jurisdictions allow this:

http://www.legaltips.org/texas/TN/tn.007.00.000542.00.aspx
 

JETX

Senior Member
seniorjudge said:
Do you have a case or statute from any jurisdiction showing that the owner of a servient easement is liable for the actions of a third party?

The 'cops' have no jurisdiction to enforce traffic laws on private property.

Some jurisdictions allow this:
And, of course, that has NOTHING to do with the issue of this thread. Any private development can make a request that local law enforcement include 'their' private property into public enforcement. However, it will require the approval of the local government... and usually some compensation for the services provided.
However, nothing in this thread has even suggested that is the case here.
 
S

seniorjudge

Guest
JETX said:
And, of course, that has NOTHING to do with the issue of this thread. Any private development can make a request that local law enforcement include 'their' private property into public enforcement. However, it will require the approval of the local government... and usually some compensation for the services provided.
However, nothing in this thread has even suggested that is the case here.
Q: cAN i CALL ST. POLICE??

A: Yes. That was the original question. Obviously, if they (or city or county cops) do not have jurisdiction, they will tell OP.

You said also:

Sorry, but that may not be true. If a person is injured and the damaged party can show the injury was a result of the development owners NEGLIGENCE in enforcing the private associations laws, they COULD be liable in a civil action.


And I asked:
Do you have a case or statute from any jurisdiction showing that the owner of a servient easement is liable for the actions of a third party?

Do you know of such a case or statute?
 

JETX

Senior Member
seniorjudge said:
Do you have a case or statute from any jurisdiction showing that the owner of a servient easement is liable for the actions of a third party?[/quote
First, this is NOT a 'servient easment'.
Second, there is lots of case law as to the obligation of a negligent 3rd party.

In this case, if the property developer has laws/rules in place as to speed limits within HIS 'jurisdiction' and he clearly fails to enforce them and someone is subsequently injured due to the unenforced restriction..... the property developer COULD be included in a lawsuit. And it COULD be possible for the court to find the negligent property developer/development at least partly responsible.
Are you familiar with 'premise liability'??

In general, it is the duty of an owner to exercise reasonable care in the maintenance of the premises and to warn a visitor of any dangerous conditions that are known, or should be known to him, if the conditions are not likely to be perceived by the visitor. Factors used to determine whether the owner exercised reasonable care in maintaining the property includes (a) the foreseeability of harm to others; (b) the magnitude of the risks of injury to others if the property is kept in its current condition; (c) the benefit to an individual or to society of maintaining the property in its current condition; and (d) the cost and inconvenience of providing adequate protection.

The owner or operator of the property must have notice of the defect or circumstances that caused your injury prior to the injury having occurred. The notice can either be actual notice or implied notice, meaning the owner knew or should have known of the dangerous condition given all of the surrounding facts and circumstances. When the owner actually created the dangerous condition, then notice may be presumed. If a hazard cannot be eliminated, the owner has a duty to warn of the hazards he is aware of or should be aware of.

The duty of a possessor of land to the injured person may vary depending on the status of the person at the time of the injury. Business owners typically have the highest responsibility to those who are invited onto their premises. Homeowners also have a duty to their guests. The standard of care owed to an adult trespasser is less than that owed to a person who has permission to be on the property. An owner may be liable, however, if he maintains a condition that causes injury to a trespassing child.
 
S

seniorjudge

Guest
JETX said:
seniorjudge said:
Are you familiar with 'premise liability'??
Actually it's premises liability.

Premises liability (obviously) has to do with somebody getting hurt on somebody else's land, but there has to be a dangerous condition on the land before we start talking about premises liability.

Now, whether the "dangerous condition" is someone habitually driving erratically or not is something I do not know.

As an analogy, some states are very liberal in awarding plaintiffs damages when, for example, they are injured by a third party in a motel when there has been prior injuries of the same type at that same motel.

But let's assume that this development does NOT have public streets. Thus, the streets are servient easements owned by the developer.

He gives people (the general public I am assuming) the right to ingress and egress over his easements (the streets).

If, for example, I am a landowner and I have an access easement running across my land and my neighbor (who uses the easement) says that guests of the folks at the end of the easement are driving erratically and I do nothing about it, will I be liable when one of those idiots driving on the road runs over the neighbor's kid?

I still think not. How am I supposed to control someone's behavior on my easement? I am not like the motel owner who assumes sort of "protective custody" for my guests.

I'm just a landowner watching idiots driving on my roads.

Query: What would your advice be to this development owner if he asked you what he should do to control idiots driving erratically on his streets (aka easement)?
 

JETX

Senior Member
seniorjudge said:
Actually it's premises liability.
Only when it is more than one 'premise'. Premises liability (plural) requires more than one premise. This post only refers to one of them. ;)

Query: What would your advice be to this development owner if he asked you what he should do to control idiots driving erratically on his streets (aka easement)?
I would consider installing 'speed control devices' (aka: speed bumps). And/or consider hiring off-duty deputies to patrol the streets.
 
S

seniorjudge

Guest
JETX said:
Only when it is more than one 'premise'. Premises liability (plural) requires more than one premise. This post only refers to one of them. ;)


I would consider installing 'speed control devices' (aka: speed bumps). And/or consider hiring off-duty deputies to patrol the streets.
"Premises" is singular.

Speed bumps are good.


Definitions of premises on the Web:

* land and buildings together considered as a place of business; "bread is baked on the premises"
www.cogsci.princeton.edu/cgi-bin/webwn

* The word premise came from Latin "praemisus" meaning "placed in front".
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Premises

* A descriptive term for the land, building or parts thereof involved in a particular transaction.
www.titlemidwest.com/dictionary_p.htm

* The building insured or containing the insured property. Depending on policy conditions, it may also include an adjacent area.
ww3.komotv.com/global/story.asp

* Telephony term for the space occupied by a customer or authorized/joint user in a building(s) on continuous or contiguous property (except railroad rights of way, etc.) not separated by a public road or highway.
www.levitonvoicedata.com/learning/glossary.asp

* Savoy Place, London, WC2R 0BL
www.savoyplace.co.uk/terms.cfm

* In commercial real estate, the description of the leasehold and the specific square footage for which the parties enter into a lease.
www.windermerecommercial.com/index.cfm

* The particular location of a property or a portion thereof as designated in a policy.
www.lombard.ca/Glossary.htm

* Sentences that form the basis for a piece of reasoning; the premises in an inference are supposed to support the conclusion.
philosophy.berkeley.edu/macfarlane/25a/glossary.shtml

* This is the space occupied by the customer.
www.bugsweep.com/glossary.html

* Typically the entire rentable area leased by lessee. Sometimes used to designate solely the useable area leased by lessee, ie, that for which the lessee has exclusive occupancy as opposed to the common areas.
www.spacelease.com/SpaceLease/Glossary.asp

* A building, group of buildings and/or contiguous parcels of land under the control of a single customer and used for a single purpose. Contiguous parcels of land separated by a public road are considered to be separate premises. Separate buildings and adjoining buildings in a group of buildings, which are directly accessible to the public and function independently from the others, are separate premises. A building is defined by the National Electrical Code as a structure which stands alone or which is cut off from adjoining structures by fire walls with all openings therein protected by approved fire doors
www.pplelectric.com/business/tariff+and+rules/remsi/table+of+contents/definitions.htm

* the statements contained in an argument, excluding the conclusion
athena.english.vt.edu/~logic/glossary.html

* Premises means any place and includes a vehicle, vessel or moveable structure.
www.richmond.gov.uk/depts/env/envprotection/consumerprotection/licensing/LicensingPolicy/Glossary.htm

* Land; an estate; the subject matter of a conveyance.
www.investinmortgages.net/glossary.html

* Section 4 of the Act, 'premises' means an area of land or any other place (whether or not enclosed or built upon), a building or other structure, a vehicle, vessel or aircraft, or a part of any such premises.
www.deh.gov.au/atmosphere/cleaner-fuels/publications/sampling-manual/glossary.html

* Legal Definition: The building(s) insured, containing the insured property, and any insured property immediately adjacent are considered to be the “premises.” Translation: The building(s) and its contents that are covered under the insurance contract.
mb.thehartford.com/get_more/insurance_jargon_mq.asp

* a building or part of a building usually including the adjacent grounds.
www.businesslink.gov.uk/bdotg/action/detail

* does not include a motor vehicle, a train, a caravan, trailer, tanker or anything else pulled by a vehicle or animal.
www.osr.nsw.gov.au/pls/portal/url/page/osrhome/tax_prof/subsidies/petrolsub/definitions

* A continuous tract of land, building or group of adjacent buildings under a single control with respect to use of water and responsibility for payment therefore. Subdivision of such use or responsibility shall constitute a division into separate premises as herein defined, except that where more than one dwelling is being served through the same water service in which case each of said dwellings shall constitute a separate premises and shall be subject to the same separate charges as if separate singlefamily dwellings.
www.ci.elko.nv.us/codes/City_Municipal_Code/Title_9/1/3.html

* The premises are statements that are said to support, or give evidence for, the conclusion.
www.msu.edu/~susse/PHL200-Glossary.html

* The part of an ARGUMENT which gives reasons for accepting the CONCLUSION.
www.abdn.ac.uk/philosophy/guide/glossary.shtml

* The parcel of land, lot or lots, on which the development, improvement, or service is planned. (As stated in Section 1-2 of the Rules and Regulations.)
www.ccmaui.com/~h2oeng/glossary.html

* (1) The extent of real property owned or occupied by a person. (2) In many insurance policies, that part of the insured's property to which the protection extends, as defined in the policy. (3) Matters previously stated or set forth; provisions in a legal document, especially a deed.
www.allianceinsures.com/resources_glossary.php

* A platted lot or part thereof or unplatted lot or parcel of land, either occupied or unoccupied by any structure, and includes any such building, accessory structure, adjoining alley, easement, or drainage way.
www6.indygov.org/cp/ordinances/zonord/wel/wel203.htm

* A defined portion of land and the improvements thereon as usually described in a deed, deed of trust or mortgage.
www.homemortgageofnc.com/homemortgage/GLOSSARY/web GLOSSARY2.htm

* Generally, a piece of land with a building or buildings upon it.
www.muaco.com/en/glossary/P/
 

JETX

Senior Member
seniorjudge said:
"Premises" is singular.
Word History: Why do we call a single building the premises? To answer this question, we must go back to the Middle Ages. But first, let it be noted that premises comes from the past participle praemissa, which is both a feminine singular and a neuter plural form of the Latin verb praemittere, “to send in advance, utter by way of preface, place in front, prefix.” In Medieval Latin the feminine form praemissa was used as a term in logic, for which we still use the term premise descended from the Medieval Latin word (first recorded in a work composed before 1380). Medieval Latin praemissa in the plural meant “things mentioned before” and was used in legal documents, almost always in the plural, a use that was followed in Old French and Middle English, both of which borrowed the word from Latin. A more specific legal sense in Middle English, “that property, collectively, which is specified in the beginning of a legal document and which is conveyed, as by grant,” was also always in the plural in Middle English and later Modern English. And so it remained when this sense was extended to mean “a house or building with its grounds or appurtenances,” a usage first recorded before 1730.
 
S

seniorjudge

Guest
JETX said:
Word History: Why do we call a single building the premises? To answer this question, we must go back to the Middle Ages. But first, let it be noted that premises comes from the past participle praemissa, which is both a feminine singular and a neuter plural form of the Latin verb praemittere, “to send in advance, utter by way of preface, place in front, prefix.” In Medieval Latin the feminine form praemissa was used as a term in logic, for which we still use the term premise descended from the Medieval Latin word (first recorded in a work composed before 1380). Medieval Latin praemissa in the plural meant “things mentioned before” and was used in legal documents, almost always in the plural, a use that was followed in Old French and Middle English, both of which borrowed the word from Latin. A more specific legal sense in Middle English, “that property, collectively, which is specified in the beginning of a legal document and which is conveyed, as by grant,” was also always in the plural in Middle English and later Modern English. And so it remained when this sense was extended to mean “a house or building with its grounds or appurtenances,” a usage first recorded before 1730.

Excellent!

What is the source for that?

I attended a utilitiy law seminar in Alburquerque and the PhD giving the seminar kept talking about the utility guys going to the "premise" to hook something up.

I cringed every time he said that....
 

Find the Right Lawyer for Your Legal Issue!

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