Self v. Queen

I agree with the conclusion reached by the majority in this case, but for an entirely different reason: the novel arguments raised by the appellant on appeal were never raised below. This Court will usually decline to address a legal position when it was not addressed below, and more particularly, it will decline to address a legal principle when the facts fail to implicate the principle. The appellant asks on appeal that in premises liability eases we dispense with the distinction between licensees, invitees, and trespassers. As much as I might agree with this proposition, I am compelled to…