Known dangerous artificial latent condition
WebDec 30, 2024 · By determining whether a condition is dangerous by the degree (or solely the existence) of the injury suffered rather than the objective unreasonableness of the hazard, 1 this decision’s circular reasoning could mark the end of “dangerous” as a meaningful … Web(i) A fixed anchor used in rock climbing and put in place by someone other than a landowner is not a known dangerous artificial latent condition and a landowner under subsection (1) …
Known dangerous artificial latent condition
Did you know?
http://courts.mrsc.org/appellate/049wnapp/049wnapp0211.htm WebJun 1, 2012 · The appeals court acknowledged, however, that the state recreational use statute does not limit a landowner's liability when injuries are sustained “by reason of a …
WebApr 9, 1992 · In the phrase "known dangerous artificial latent condition" as used in the recreational use statute (RCW 4.24.210), the word "latent" refers to the condition itself, not to the injury-causing aspects of the condition. [2] Parks and Recreation – Statutory Immunity – Elements – Obvious Condition – Actual Knowledge. WebNov 1, 1994 · [1] Mr. Ertl contends he was injured by a known, dangerous, artificial and latent condition of the road. Because this is a review of a grant of summary judgment, our review is de novo. Rice v. Dow Chem. Co., 124 Wn.2d 205, 208, 875 P.2d 1213 (1994). Both parties tie disposition of this case to the meaning of the words "latent condition". Mr.
WebFor purposes of RCW 4.24.210(3), under which owners of land used by the public for outdoor recreation are not immune from liability for unintentional injuries caused by known dangerous artificial latent conditions for which warning signs have not been conspicuously posted, a condition is "latent" if it is not readily apparent to the general ... WebThe defendant is liable for "injuries sustained * * * by reason of a known dangerous artificial latent condition for which warning signs have not been conspicuously posted * * *." Go to; On the day of the accident the plaintiff, her husband and her three children were attending a picnic at the lake. The plaintiff became apprehensive about her ...
WebApr 27, 2004 · The landowner may be held liable, however, if a fee is charged, if the injury is intentional, or if a “known dangerous artificial latent condition” exists and conspicuous warning signs are not posted. Former RCW 4.24.210(3) (1997); Tabak v. State, 73 Wash.App. 691, 695, 870 P.2d 1014 (1994). Here, the County is a landowner. ...
Weba "known dangerous artificial latent condition" under the statute. Because Jewels fails to show that the City had actual knowledge of the injury-causing condition, we affirm. FACTS Cornwall Park is a park open to the public for recreational use without charge. The City owns and maintains the park. On June 30, 2008, while riding spas with hotbeds near berkshireWebA hidden or concealed defect; one which could not be discovered by reasonable and customary observation or inspection. The concept of “latent defects” can relate to both … spas wisconsinWebAs the statute is written, the condition must be known, dangerous, artificial and latent. The condition here was not latent because the tracks were obvious and was not dangerous … technicolor thomsonWebFeb 7, 2024 · An exception to the traditional analysis is RCW 4.24.210 which provides that if property is open for recreational use without a fee, then a landowner is not liable for injuries except by reason of “a known dangerous artificial latent condition for which warning signs have not been conspicuously posted.” technicolor torontohttp://courts.mrsc.org/appellate/076wnapp/076wnapp0110.htm technicolor tg799 xtreamtechnicolor turnoverWebAll four elements (known, dangerous, artificial, latent) must be present in the injury-causing condition for liability to attach to the landowner. Davis, 144 Wn.2d at 616. The lack of … technicolor tg800vac