Johnson v. Krueger
36 Colo. App. 242, 539 P.2d 1296 (1975)
Premium Feature
Subscribe to Lexplug to listen to the Case Podcast.
Rule of Law:
A landowner does not breach the duty of reasonable care by maintaining a visible, static condition on their property if it is not reasonably foreseeable that a person would enter the property in a particular manner and be injured by that condition.
Facts:
- Warren and Doris Krueger had a tree stump on their front lawn that was approximately six inches in diameter and stood 8 to 10 inches above the ground.
- The stump was located about 14.5 feet inside the Kruegers' property line and had a new shoot growing from its base that was three to four feet tall.
- On September 14, 1972, 11-year-old Ronald W. Johnson (Ron) was playing touch football with other children on the lawn of the property adjacent to the Kruegers' property.
- During the game, Ron ran onto the Kruegers' property while looking back over his shoulder to watch for an incoming football pass.
- While running and looking backward, Ron either leaped or tripped (but not on the stump itself) and fell onto the stump, sustaining serious injuries.
- Warren Krueger had previously observed children playing on the adjacent lot and occasionally crossing his property, but had not seen them playing in his yard or throwing balls into it.
Procedural Posture:
- Ronald O. Johnson, on behalf of himself and his minor son Ronald W. Johnson, filed a tort action against Warren F. and Doris E. Krueger in a Colorado trial court.
- The case proceeded to a jury trial.
- At the close of the plaintiffs' presentation of evidence (except for medical testimony), the defendants made a motion to dismiss the complaint.
- The trial court granted the defendants' motion to dismiss, finding no evidence of negligence or proximate cause, and entered a judgment dismissing the complaint.
- The plaintiffs (appellants) appealed the trial court's dismissal to the Colorado Court of Appeals.
Premium Content
Subscribe to Lexplug to view the complete brief
You're viewing a preview with Rule of Law, Facts, and Procedural Posture
Issue:
Does a landowner breach their duty of reasonable care by maintaining a visible tree stump on their property when a child playing on an adjacent lot runs a considerable distance onto the landowner's property, while looking backward to catch a ball, and is injured by falling on the stump?
Opinions:
Majority - Enoch, Judge
No, the landowner did not breach their duty of reasonable care. A landowner has a duty to exercise reasonable care to prevent harm to those on their property, with the key consideration being the foreseeability of injury. The court found that the Kruegers did not act unreasonably in leaving the stump on their property because it was not reasonably foreseeable that a child playing on an adjacent lot would run a considerable distance onto their property, while looking backward, and fall on a clearly visible stump. The court affirmed that under the modern standard established in Mile High Fence Co. v. Radovich, the status of the entrant (e.g., trespasser) is not the controlling factor, but rather one consideration in determining whether the landowner acted reasonably in view of the foreseeability of injury. Since the plaintiffs' evidence failed to establish a scenario where a jury could reasonably find negligence, the trial court's dismissal was proper.
Analysis:
This case clarifies the application of the modern, unified standard of care for landowners established in Mile High Fence Co. v. Radovich. It demonstrates that while the old classifications of trespasser, licensee, and invitee are no longer determinative, the concept of foreseeability remains the cornerstone of landowner liability. The decision underscores that a landowner is not an absolute insurer of safety for all entrants; liability only attaches when an injury is a reasonably foreseeable consequence of a condition on the property. This precedent helps define the practical limits of a landowner's duty, showing that even with child entrants, liability will not be imposed for injuries resulting from unusual or unanticipated circumstances.
