Business Customer Accidents

Is there a Difference between Invitees, Licensees, and Trespassers Injured in California?

In the state of California, duties of commercial or residential property owners or occupier are no longer imposed only on the basis of fixed classifications of invitee, licensee, or trespasser. Like in many other states, a business owner’s duty to maintain safe premises in California was previously depending solely on the status of the injured victim. A personal injury victim who filed a lawsuit was typically classified as an invitee or a licensee in business customer accidents, unless the victim was a trespasser. An invitee is defined as someone who is invited to the property to conduct business or for any other purpose related to the owner’s business dealings or commercial benefit. This invitation may be expressly stated or simply implied. For example, a restaurant visitor or a retail shopper is an invitee since that person is on the premises of the restaurant or the store to purchase food or something else, which is a purpose related to the owner’s commercial benefit. Licensees, alternatively, are people who have an invitation or believe they have been invited to company property for any purpose that is not related to the owner’s business or commercial dealings. For instance, a delivery person at a restaurant or store, a technician who was on the premises to fix something, or a friend who was invited to visit for non-business reasons qualify as licensees. For many years, licensees were not owed the same duty of care as invitees. Finally, business owners formerly had no duty to make the premises safe for trespassers, nor they had duty to warn of dangers, when the owners were not aware of the trespasser’s presence. Over the years, however, California rules on imposing liability merely on the basis of one’s status as an invitee, licensee, or trespasser has been changed.

In Ann M. v. Pacific Plaza Shopping Center (1993), the court ruled that the purpose of an injured plaintiff’s presence on the land is no longer determinative. On the other hand, the court recognized that this purpose may have some bearing upon the liability determination, and therefore should be weighed along with other factors while imposing duty on the owner or occupier of the land. The facts of your case must be properly considered in order to evaluate liability for your particular matter. In either case, keep in mind that any safety hazards in a property, whether commercial or residential, must be accompanied by visible warnings and/or fixed in a reasonable amount of time. Consult with a lawyer who can carefully evaluate your case under the given circumstances of your legal matter.