Section 6-5-345

Duty of care owed by possessor of real property to certain trespassers.

(a) For the purpose of this section, the following words have the following meanings:

(1) POSSESSOR OF REAL PROPERTY or POSSESSOR. The owner, lessee, renter, or other lawful occupant of real property.

(2) TRESPASSER. A person who goes upon the premises of another without permission or invitation, expressed or implied, or who, after rightfully entering upon the premises of another, remains on the premises after consent or license to enter or use the premises has been terminated.

(b)(1) A possessor of real property owes no duty of care to a trespasser except to:

a. Refrain from causing wanton or intentional injury, including by a trap or pitfall.

b. Exercise reasonable care to avoid causing injury to a known trespasser in a position of peril and to use reasonable care to warn a known trespasser of dangers known by the possessor to exist on the property.

c. Exercise reasonable diligence to warn a trespasser of dangers known after discovery that the trespasser is in a position of peril after the possessor has knowledge of the presence of the trespasser.

d. Exercise reasonable care to warn a known trespasser of dangers known by the possessor to exist on the property after the possessor becomes aware of the danger to the trespasser. Nothing in this section shall diminish, change, amend, or otherwise affect the open and obvious doctrine.

(2) A possessor of real property, however, may cause injury or use force to prevent or terminate a trespass as permitted at common law or in Title 13A, Chapter 3, Article 2.

(c) Notwithstanding the provisions of subsection (b), a possessor of real property may be subject to liability for physical injury or death to a child trespasser caused by an artificial condition upon the real property of the possessor, if all of the following apply:

(1) The place where the condition existed is one upon which the possessor knew or had reason to know that a child would be likely to trespass.

(2) The condition is one of which the possessor knew or had reason to know and which the possessor realized or should have realized would involve an unreasonable risk of death or serious bodily harm to a child.

(3) The injured child, because of his or her youth, did not discover the condition or realize the risk involved in intermeddling with the condition or in coming within the area made dangerous by it.

(4) The utility to the possessor of maintaining the condition and the burden of eliminating the danger was slight as compared with the risk to the child.

(5) The possessor failed to exercise reasonable care to eliminate the danger or otherwise to protect the child.

(d) Notwithstanding the provisions of subsection (c), the duty owed by the possessor of real property to a child trespasser with respect to a natural condition is the same as that owed in subsection (b).

(e) The intent of the Legislature in enacting this section is to reject the adoption of the Third Restatement of Torts with respect to the duty of a possessor of real property to a trespasser. Nothing in this section shall diminish, change, amend, or otherwise affect the provisions of Sections 35-15-1 through 35-15-40.

(Act 2012-300, p. 654, §1.)