What if My Child is Hurt Due to an Attractive Nuisance?

There may be no worse experience on earth than having your child get seriously hurt. As parents, we worry for their safety and take steps to protect them from harm, but sometimes, things happen that are out of our control.

Children do not always have the experience and knowledge to understand when they’ve encountered something that is dangerous. They are often attracted to features on property that pose a great risk of harm, but they aren’t capable of weighing the risk or even foreseeing it. These features are known as attractive nuisances. They are much worse than the name suggests.

They are features that often appeal to lively children but that can cause them to suffer serious or even deadly injuries. That’s much more than a nuisance—it’s a menace. 

Property owners who allow a feature such as this to harm children can be held accountable for injuries and harm suffered, even if a child is trespassing when they are hurt. An experienced personal injury attorney can explain how the doctrine of attractive nuisance might apply in a particular situation, but here are some general factors that can affect a case and the family’s right to compensation when a child is hurt.

Liability of Property Owners in Georgia

To understand how the doctrine of attractive nuisance works, it is helpful to have some background information about the duty of property owners in Georgia. All property owners have an obligation to avoid doing things that would either intentionally or wantonly cause harm to people who come onto their property. That means that even if someone is trespassing, the property owner can’t set up booby traps that could hurt them.

When the owner of the property invites or allows other people onto the property, then the owner has additional obligations. The owner is expected to take steps to prevent injuries. But that duty to protect people does not generally apply to those who are trespassing on the property. The property owner cannot take actions that could harm trespassers, but there is no general duty to protect them.

Attractive nuisance is the exception to this rule about trespassers. It only applies to children.

The Doctrine of Attractive Nuisance as Applied in Georgia

The attractive nuisance doctrine evolved in traditional English common law from a general concept of fairness and logic. Adults are expected to understand the concept of property ownership and trespassing, and adults can read warning signs. Adults can also comprehend potential risks. But young children have not yet developed these understandings and abilities. They often do not understand that they are not allowed on other people’s property without permission. They also do not always recognize when something on that property can hurt them. 

Because of this, the law imposes a duty on property owners when they have a feature on their property that children might want to come explore or play with, and that feature could foreseeably cause them to get hurt. The likelihood of harm must be foreseeable. Property owners don’t have an unlimited obligation to protect against every potential injury a child could suffer on the premises.

In Georgia, the doctrine has not been incorporated into a statute, but it is established in case law based on a classic understanding of the principles.

Under the classic  understanding of attractive nuisance, a property owner can be held liable for harm that occurs to a child who is trespassing if all of the following conditions apply:

• The harm was caused by an artificial condition added to the land (not a natural feature)
• The condition is in a place where the property owner knows or should know that children are likely to be able to trespass
• The property owner knows or should realize that the condition poses an unreasonable risk of death or serious bodily harm to children
• The children are young enough not to realize the risk
• The usefulness of the hazardous condition and the effort required to make it safe are minor compared with the risk the condition poses to children
• The property owner failed to take reasonable steps to eliminate the danger or protect trespassing children from danger

Section 51-3-3 of the Georgia Code specifies that the doctrine should be applied as it existed as of January 1, 2014. (This means that attempts to expand the classic understanding of the doctrine to apply to adults are not recognized in Georgia.)

Examples of Attractive Nuisances

The example of an attractive nuisance that may be the most common in Georgia is a swimming pool. Owners need to take steps to keep children out, such as fencing the area around the pool and locking the access point. Other examples of features on property that could be considered an attractive nuisance include:

• Abandoned vehicles
• Old appliances
• Trampolines
• Fountains
• Construction equipment
• Treehouses
• Playground equipment
• Scaffolding and ladders
• Wells and open pits

When there is a feature on property that a child might want to explore or play on, and that feature could cause harm, property owners have an obligation to protect children who might be attracted to it.

If Your Child Was Injured Because of an Attractive Nuisance

When a young child suffers serious injuries such as traumatic brain injuries, the consequences can be extremely costly. The child will require extensive medical care and rehabilitation. In addition, the child might suffer from permanent disabilities that interfere with the ability to learn, enjoy daily activities, and eventually work and function as an independent adult. 

In situations where the injuries resulted from a property owner’s negligence in leaving access to an attractive nuisance unprotected, that property owner can be required to pay compensation for the child’s future and the family’s anguish. When this type of tragedy occurs, it is important to consult a knowledgeable premises liability or wrongful death attorney for assistance as soon as possible because it will be necessary to gather and preserve evidence while it is most readily available.

Michael M. Day Fights for Full Compensation When a Property Owner’s Negligence Causes Harm

In cases where the attractive nuisance doctrine applies and in a variety of other situations where the negligence of a property owner causes injuries, the team at Michael M. Day Law Firm, LLC knows how to work effectively to establish liability and fight for maximum compensation for all the losses suffered. For a free consultation to discuss how we may be able to help in your situation, call us at 404-480-4284 or contact us online today.