Legal Definitions - mere licensee

A mere licensee (sometimes called a bare licensee) is an individual who has permission from a property owner to enter or remain on their land, but solely for the licensee's own convenience, pleasure, or benefit, and not for any purpose that benefits the property owner. The permission granted to a mere licensee is often informal, implied, or gratuitous.

Because the mere licensee is on the property for their own reasons and provides no benefit to the owner, the property owner owes them the lowest duty of care. Generally, this means the owner must not intentionally harm them or set traps, and must warn them of any *known* hidden dangers that the licensee would not reasonably discover on their own. The owner is typically not required to inspect the property for unknown hazards or make it safe for the mere licensee.

Here are some examples to illustrate this concept:

• Shortcut Through a Field: Imagine a homeowner who owns a large, undeveloped field adjacent to a public walking path. Over time, people from the neighborhood start regularly cutting across a corner of this field as a shortcut to reach the path, saving a few minutes. The homeowner is aware of this practice and has never explicitly given permission, but also has never objected or put up "No Trespassing" signs. One day, a person using this shortcut trips over an old, partially buried tree stump that the homeowner knew was there but had forgotten about. In this scenario, the person using the shortcut would likely be considered a mere licensee. They are on the property with the homeowner's implied permission (by not objecting) and solely for their own convenience (to save time). The homeowner would generally only be liable if they intentionally harmed the person or failed to warn them of a *known* hidden danger like the stump.

• Waiting in a Driveway: Consider a teenager who asks a neighbor if they can wait in their driveway for a ride to school, as it's a safer and more convenient spot than the street. The neighbor agrees, saying, "Sure, no problem." While waiting, the teenager leans against a loose fence post that the neighbor knew was unstable but hadn't gotten around to fixing, and the post gives way, causing the teenager to fall. Here, the teenager is a mere licensee. They are on the property with express permission from the neighbor, but their presence is solely for their own convenience (waiting for a ride) and provides no benefit to the neighbor. The neighbor's duty of care would extend to warning the teenager about the *known* unstable fence post, but not necessarily to inspecting the entire driveway for other potential hazards.

• Recreational Access on Private Land: A group of friends frequently hikes in a wilderness area. To access a particularly scenic part of a public trail, they often cross a small, unmaintained dirt track that cuts across a corner of private ranch land. The ranch owner knows that hikers occasionally use this track and, while not actively encouraging it, has never posted "Private Property" signs or confronted anyone. One of the hikers steps into a hidden, unmarked hole that the ranch owner was aware of from a previous landscaping project but had not filled in or marked. The hikers are likely mere licensees. They have implied permission to be on the property (as the owner tolerates their presence) and are there for their own recreational enjoyment, not for any benefit to the ranch owner. The ranch owner would have a duty to warn them of the *known* hidden hole, but not to actively search for or eliminate all potential dangers on the unmaintained track.