In premises liability cases, many other states in the country still distinguish between whether an injured person had permission, either expressed or implied, to be on the property where their injury took place. The idea is that landowners should not have the same obligation to make the land safe for someone whom they may not even know is there and who certainly does not have permission to be on the property.
It is important for the residents of Riverside and all residents of California to recognize that this state is not one of those states that makes these sorts of rigid distinctions. In California, a landowner has a duty to exercise reasonable care to make his or her property safe for everyone, including those who are technically trespassing on the land.
This is not to say that why someone is on another person's land will get no consideration, but where and why someone was on a particular piece of property will just be considered among other factors when a judge or jury decides exactly what a reasonable property owner would have done to keep his or her land safe. In other words, property owners should not worry too much about the hypothetical case of a burglar cutting himself on glass while trying to break in to a home and then suing the owner for the injury.
What landowners should focus on, however, is making their property reasonably safe without regard to who is coming on it.
California's practical approach to premises liability is general speaking, good for the people of this state, as they do not have to go through hoops to prove they had permission to be on an owner's land and, thus, are entitled to some compensation for injuries. Nevertheless, premises liability cases are still complicated affairs, and the assistance of a skilled California personal injury attorney may be invaluable.