Legal Definitions - attractive nuisance doctrine

The attractive nuisance doctrine is a legal principle that holds property owners responsible for injuries to trespassing children if there is a dangerous condition on their land that is likely to attract young people who may not understand the risks involved.

Normally, a property owner owes a very limited duty to trespassers, meaning individuals who enter the property without permission. However, this doctrine creates an exception for children. It recognizes that certain features or conditions on a property can be so enticing to children—like a magnet—that they might be drawn onto the land, even if they know they shouldn't be there. Because children, especially young ones, often lack the judgment to recognize or appreciate serious dangers, the law imposes a higher duty of care on the property owner.

Under the attractive nuisance doctrine, a property owner must take reasonable steps to protect trespassing children from these appealing but dangerous conditions. This might involve removing the hazard, securing it so children cannot access it, or providing clear and effective warnings. The doctrine typically applies when:

• The property owner knows or should know that children are likely to trespass in the area where the condition exists.
• The condition itself poses an unreasonable risk of serious injury or death to children.
• Children, due to their age, are unlikely to discover or understand the danger.
• The cost or effort for the owner to eliminate the danger or protect children is small compared to the risk of harm.
• The owner fails to take reasonable steps to address the danger.

It's important to note that this doctrine usually does not apply to common, everyday objects or conditions that children generally understand to be dangerous, like a simple fence or a wall, unless there's a hidden danger.

Here are a few examples illustrating the attractive nuisance doctrine:

• Unsecured Construction Site: Imagine a residential neighborhood where a new house is being built. The construction site, though fenced, has a gate that is frequently left unlocked. Inside, there are large piles of sand, partially built structures, and heavy machinery like excavators. Children in the neighborhood might see this as an exciting playground, a place to climb and explore. If a child trespasses through the unlocked gate, climbs onto an unsecured piece of equipment, and is injured, the property owner (or contractor) could be held liable under the attractive nuisance doctrine. The site is inherently attractive to children, poses significant dangers they are unlikely to fully appreciate (e.g., unstable structures, pinch points on machinery), and securing the gate or equipment would be a reasonable and relatively easy step to prevent harm.

• Abandoned Well or Cistern: Consider a rural property with an old, uncovered well or a large, open cistern that is no longer in use. The property is located near a public hiking trail or a residential area where children often play. The well, with its dark opening and potential for echoes, might pique a child's curiosity, drawing them to peer inside. If a child falls into the well and is seriously injured, the property owner could be found liable. The well is an attractive feature that presents a hidden, severe danger (falling into deep water or onto hard ground) that a child would not likely comprehend. Covering or fencing the well would be a relatively simple measure to prevent such a tragedy.