Bennett v. Stanley
Supreme Court of Ohio
92 Ohio St. 3d 35 (2001)
- Written by Lauren Petersen, JD
Facts
Bennett (plaintiff) was a five-year-old boy who lived next to Stanley (defendant). Stanley owned a swimming pool that was in neglect and had become pond-like, containing frogs, snakes, and algae. The pool had no ladders, was not fenced in, and Stanley had not posted any signs around the pool. The property line between the Bennetts and the Stanleys was marked by a fence with an eight-foot gap in the middle. Stanley knew that children lived next door, and he had seen the children playing unsupervised outside. Looking for frogs in the pool, Bennett fell into the water and drowned. Bennett’s family brought a negligence claim against Stanley, claiming that Stanley’s pool created an unreasonable risk of danger to Bennett. The trial court granted summary judgment in favor of Stanley, holding that because Bennett was a trespasser, Stanley only had to “refrain from wanton and wilful misconduct.”
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Pfeifer, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 810,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,300 briefs, keyed to 988 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.
