Laserfiche WebLink
<br />SEP-19-2005 15:00 <br /> <br />LEAGUE OF MN CITIES <br /> <br />6512811296 P.06 <br />50 <br /> <br />condition which unreasonably annoys, ~nJures or endangers the <br />safety, health, morals, comfort or repose of any considerable <br />number of members of the public." Id. In general, sewage and <br />drainage conditions which menace public health are nuisances per <br />se and are subject to summary abatement. McQuillan's Munici1;>al <br />Coroorations, ~24. 257. Stagnant water, particularly where <br />insects breed, is without a doubt a public nuisance. lQ. at <br />!i24.2650. <br /> <br />Courts have used the nuisance theory in drowning accident <br />cases which have occurred on land owned by a county. Caywood v. <br />Board of County Comm'rs of Sedawick County, 200 Kan. 134, 434 <br />F.2d 780 (1967). Here, the court listed the following things as <br />nuisances, sewage plants discharging raw sewage, a public dump <br />which contained a stagnant pool and a defective surface water <br />drain. Then the court stated that swimming pools in city parks, <br />an artificial drainage channel and a sandpit excavation full of <br />water are not public nuisances. Id. at 786-87. <br /> <br />STANDARDS QF CARE <br /> <br />Minnesota courts have followed the various standards of <br />care found in the Restatement (Second) of Torts with regard to <br />the above situations. Each situation has a different standard <br />of care based on the age of the plaintiff and the locacion of <br />the waterway. The general rule for liability of possessors of <br />land to trespassers is Restatement (Second) of Torts ~333. See <br />HUQ'hes V. Ouarve & Anderson Co., 338 N.W.2d 422, 424 (Minn. <br />1983) (Restatement (Second) of Torts ~!i333, 335 are the <br />standards of care for adult trespassers). The rule states a <br />possessor Of land is not liable to trespassers for a physical <br />harm caused by his failure to exercise reasonable care <br /> <br />(a) to put the land in a condition reasonably safe for <br />their reception, or <br />(b) to carry on his activities so as not to endanger them. <br /> <br />If the waterway is a drainage ditCh or some other type of <br />artificial condition which is highly dangerous to constant <br />trespassers, the standard of care is Restatement (Second) of <br />Torts ~335. See Lawler v. Soo line R.R. Co., 424 N.W.2d 313, <br />316 (Minn. Ct. App. 1988); Watters v. Buckbee Mears Co., 354 <br />N.W.2d 848, 850 (Minn. Ct. App. 1984) (Both cases utilize <br />Restatement (Second) of Torts S335 in analyzing each claim). <br />The rule states a possessor of land who knows, or from facts <br />within his knowledge should know, that trespassers constantly <br />intrude upon a limited area of land, is subject to liability for <br />bodily harm caused by an artificial condition on the.land, if <br /> <br />(a) the condition <br />(i) is one which the possessor has created or <br />maintained and <br /> <br />4 <br /> <br />~-I~ <br />