Quimbee logo
DMCA.com Protection Status

Hill v. National Grid

11 A.3d 110 (2011)

Case BriefQ&ARelatedOptions
From our private database of 22,300+ case briefs...

Hill v. National Grid

Rhode Island Supreme Court

11 A.3d 110 (2011)

Facts

One fall afternoon Austin Hill (plaintiff) and a group of other young boys were playing touch football on a vacant lot near their homes. Their game was interrupted when Austin stumbled and cut himself on a protruding metal post. Because he was bleeding profusely, Austin immediately went home and his mother, Rebecca (plaintiff), took him to the emergency room for treatment. Rebecca and Harry Hill (plaintiffs), on behalf of Austin, filed suit against National Grid (defendant), the owner of the vacant lot, on the theory of attractive nuisance. National Grid claimed it owed no duty of care to Austin or the other boys because they were trespassing on the property. The trial court granted summary judgment to National Grid because the Hills failed to show that the company knew or had reason to know that children were trespassing on the vacant lot. The Hills appealed.

Rule of Law

Issue

Holding and Reasoning (Flaherty, J.)

What to do next…

  1. Unlock this case brief with a free (no-commitment) trial membership of Quimbee.

    You’ll be in good company: Quimbee is one of the most widely used and trusted sites for law students, serving more than 517,000 law students since 2011. Some law schools—such as Yale, Berkeley, and Northwestern—even subscribe directly to Quimbee for all their law students.

    Unlock this case briefRead our student testimonials
  2. Learn more about Quimbee’s unique (and proven) approach to achieving great grades at law school.

    Quimbee is a company hell-bent on one thing: helping you get an “A” in every course you take in law school, so you can graduate at the top of your class and get a high-paying law job. We’re not just a study aid for law students; we’re the study aid for law students.

    Learn about our approachRead more about Quimbee

Here's why 517,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:

  • Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 22,300 briefs, keyed to 984 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.

Questions and answers

Have a question about this case?

Sign up for a free 7-day trial and ask it

Access this case brief for FREE

With a 7-day free trial membership
Here's why 517,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
  • Reliable - written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students
  • The right length and amount of information - includes the facts, issue, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents
  • Access in your class - works on your mobile and tablet
  • 22,300 briefs - keyed to 984 casebooks
  • Uniform format for every case brief
  • Written in plain English - not in legalese and not just repeating the court's language
  • Massive library of related video lessons - and practice questions
  • Top-notch customer support

Access this case brief for FREE

With a 7-day free trial membership