Question: IRAC METHOD CASE EXAMPLE 5-8 David Hanson v. Hyatt Corp. 554 N.E.2d 394 (III. 1990) [P]laintiff was not a registered guest at defendant's hotel. He

IRAC METHOD
IRAC METHOD CASE EXAMPLE 5-8 David Hanson v.
IRAC METHOD CASE EXAMPLE 5-8 David Hanson v.
CASE EXAMPLE 5-8 David Hanson v. Hyatt Corp. 554 N.E.2d 394 (III. 1990) [P]laintiff was not a registered guest at defendant's hotel. He entered the pool area sometime after 9:30 p.m. through a gap/hole in a fence surround- ing the pool. It was dark, and the lights around the pool area were off.... [Hje dove into Hyatt's pool and sustained injuries which rendered him a quadriplegic; he was 19 years old at the time of (continued) the accident.... Hanson argues that he properly alleged the element of duty...based upon Hyatt's implied invitation to him to enter upon its premises "for the purpose of inspection and use of is restaurant, gift shop, meeting rooms, lobbies, and swimming pool" as a licensee or invitee. The implied invitation concerning his use of Hyatt's swimming pool is specifically based on the allegation that the pool was not fully enclosed and was open to access by the public at large... Hanson was required to allege facts to support a relationship which imposed a duty on Hyatt to protect him from his injury.... A [business operator] has a duty to exercise reasonable care for the safety of an invitee. The duty owed to a licensee or trespasser is not to willfully and wantonly injure him and to use ordinary care to avoid injuring him after he is discovered in a place of danger. Hanson...appears to define an implied invitation as a failure by Hyatt to take reasonable steps to secure access to the pool area, presumably by closing up a hole in the fence through which he entered on the date of the accident... We find this argument without merit...(To be upon premises by an implied invitation means that the person is there for a purpose connected with the business in which the owner of the premises is engaged. Here, Hanson simply failed to allege facts to support a position that he was using Hyatt's swimming pool for a reason connected with Hyatt's business... Plaintiff is a trespasser. Judg- ment for the hotel. CASE QUESTION 1. Why do you think the duty imposed on businesses vis--vis trespassers is significantly less than for invitees

Step by Step Solution

There are 3 Steps involved in it

1 Expert Approved Answer
Step: 1 Unlock blur-text-image
Question Has Been Solved by an Expert!

Get step-by-step solutions from verified subject matter experts

Step: 2 Unlock
Step: 3 Unlock

Students Have Also Explored These Related General Management Questions!