Bogart v. Hester
New Mexico Supreme Court
1DissentLujan, Chief Justice
Appellees’ motion for summary judgment was granted by the trial court on the ground that at the time of the injury appellant was upon the premises as a trespasser or bare licensee and, as such, the only duty owed to him was not to wilfully or wantonly injure him, and that there was no allegation of such wilful or wanton acts.
The case was squarely presented to this court on the issue of the duty owed by a landowner or occupier to a licensee or trespasser in the conduct of active operations on the premises.
Rather than answering what I feel is the determinative question in this case, the…
2Cases cited47 opinions
- Oettinger v. StewartCalifornia Supreme Court · 1944
- Barry v. . N.Y.C. H.R.R.R. Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1883
- Mayer v. Temple Properties Inc.New York Court of Appeals · 1954
- Potter Title and Trust Co. v. YoungSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1951
- Brigman v. . Construction Co.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1926
42 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.