OwnersAndOccupiersOfLand-OutsideThePremises-Salevan_v_WilmingtonParkInc by aiowmnyv




Salevan v. Wilmington Park, Inc., Superior Court of Delaware, 1950 As a landowner, did ∆ have a duty to exercise reasonable care in the use of its land so as to prevent injuries to travelers using the adjacent Hwy? Issue Reasoning Rule
The public has the right to free and unmolested use of the public hwys, and that abutting landowners may not so use their land as to interfere with the rights of persons lawfully using the highways

(1) ∏ passing by a ball park gets hit by a baseball that flew out the park (2) maintained and rented by ∆. (3) On average 16-18 balls fly out of the park per game and 2-3 of them land where the ∏ was passing.

∆ is required to take reasonable precautions, under the circumstances and history of the game of baseball, for the protection of the public. ∆ took insufficient precautions to protect passers by.

Held Procedure P argues D argues

Judgment for ∏. ∆ took insufficient precautions to protect passers by. $2500 to compensate for injuries received. ∆ had notice of the danger… (the history of number of foul balls going over the fence per game) ∆ showed that consideration was given to the protection of the public when the park was first built.

To top