§4.2 - Status Versus Reasonable Care

• Jurisdiction: Washington

§4.2STATUS VERSUS REASONABLE CARE

The venerable age of premises liability law and its sometimes hair-splitting distinctions have precipitated a movement toward a single reasonable care standard. At least nine other jurisdictions have abolished use of the common-law classification of invitees, licensees, and trespassers. See Vitauts M. Gulbis, Annotation, Modern Status of Rules Conditioning Landowner's Liability Upon Status of Injured Party as Invitee, Licensee, or Trespasser, 22 A.L.R.4TH 294 (1983). In Washington, the common-law status classification scheme has been questioned in several cases. E.g., Egede-Nissen v. Crystal Mountain, Inc., 93 Wn.2d 127, 606 P.2d 1214 (1980); Ward v. Thompson, 57 Wn.2d 655, 359 P.2d 143 (1961).

Although the Washington Supreme Court has acknowledged that the present common-law system is subject to numerous exceptions, the court has held firm to the status-based body of law governing premises liability:

The reasons proffered for continuing the distinctions include that the distinctions have been applied and developed over the years, offering a degree of stability and predictability and...