Women-Owned Business


August 09th, 2016/By Admin/In Newsletter

Nevada Law Limits Duty Owed To Trespassers

For more than 20 years, Nevada was among the minority of states which required the possessor of land to protect every person who entered upon their property, including trespassers.  This meant that the same duty of care was owed to a trespasser as to an invited guest.  Under Moody v. Manny’s Auto Repair, 871 P.2d 935 (Nev. 1994), injured trespassers successfully sued land possessors by proving that a dangerous condition existed that the possessors knew, or should have known about, but for which they failed to take corrective action or properly warn.

On May 30, 2015, Senate Bill 160 (“SB160) was enacted in the State of Nevada bringing some common-sense relief.  While restoring the more traditional limited duties that a land possessor customarily owes to an uninvited guest, it also leaves in place the land possessor’s duties owed to licensees and invitees.  The statute holds that the possessor of land owes no duty of care to a trespasser for physical harm caused as a result of the possessor’s failure to exercise reasonable care.  However, the possessor of land (still) cannot willfully or wantonly injure the trespasser; and must exercise reasonable care to prevent injury to the trespasser after the trespasser’s presence in a place of danger is known. SB160 also contains an “attractive nuisance doctrine” which imposes a higher standard of care on the land possessor toward a trespassing child.

So, unless the owner, lessee, or other possessor of land intentionally harms the trespasser; or fails to warn the trespasser of a dangerous condition once the trespasser’s presence is discovered; or the trespasser is a child –  no liability can be found.

[This article is for informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. Do not act or rely upon any of the resources and information contained herein without seeking appropriate professional assistance.]

prin icon

Comments are closed.