Orthmann v. Apple River Campground, Inc.
United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit
757 F.2d 909 (1985)
- Written by Rose VanHofwegen, JD
Facts
Tourist Owen Orthmann (plaintiff), age 19, rented an inner tube at a campground near Somerset, Wisconsin to float on the river. For a fee, campers could rent a tube, float four miles, and ride a bus back to the starting point. A tree leaning over the river midway created a popular natural diving board where a line of kids waited a turn. Orthmann did not want to wait in line and had seen others dive safely from the bank instead. Cloudy water reflected the sunlight, so Orthmann could not see the shallow bottom. He dove from the bank and hit his head on a rock, rendering him paralyzed. Instead of suing the landowner of the property where the accident occurred, Orthmann brought a premises-liability action against Apple River Campground, Inc. and seven other local businesses comprising a joint venture that promoted the tubing called the Floater’s Association (Floater’s), along with the Village of Somerset (defendants). Orthmann argued that Floater’s owned most of the four-mile stretch and controlled the banks, even though it did not own the particular parcel where the tree stood. Floater’s did maintain the banks and provide trash cans for tubers, in addition to renting tubes. Floater’s also cut down the popular tree shortly after the incident—without the landowner’s permission. Meanwhile, the trial court dismissed Orthmann’s complaint for failure to state a claim against Floater’s members as non-owners of the property. (The court also granted summary judgment for Somerset due to lack of statutorily required notice.) Orthmann appealed.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Posner, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 812,000 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.