Plaintiff was a tenant in a house built by Defendant which had a dangerous route of entrance.
Plaintiff was aware of the danger but was injured one night in returning via the entrance and sued Defendant.
CA allowed the claim and his knowledge did not break the chain of causation nor was it reasonable to expect him to make his own changes to the entrance nor was it unreasonable for him to run the risk of being injured since it was the only entrance to the house.
A plaintiff’s knowledge of or opportunity to inspect a defect will not exclude Defendant’s liability except where Plaintiff was free to remove or avoid the danger (i.e. it was reasonable for him to do so) AND unreasonable for him to run the risk of injury.
Ask questions 🙋 Get answers 📔 It's simple 👁️👄👁️
Our AI is educated by the highest scoring students across all subjects and schools. Join hundreds of your peers today.
Get StartedThese product samples contain the same concepts we cover in this case.