What Is an Attractive Nuisance in California?

Property owners in California have a duty to maintain safe conditions on their premises. This responsibility extends to children who may be drawn to certain hazardous conditions—known as attractive nuisances—even if they are trespassing. But what exactly qualifies as an attractive nuisance, and how does this legal doctrine impact real-life cases?

‍

Understanding the Attractive Nuisance Doctrine

The attractive nuisance doctrine is a legal principle that holds property owners liable for injuries to children caused by hazardous conditions on their land, even if the child was trespassing. The rationale behind this rule is that children may not recognize the dangers posed by certain hazards and should be afforded extra legal protection.

‍

‍

Can a Property Owner Be Held Responsible for Injuries Caused by an Attractive Nuisance?

Yes. Under California law, a property owner can be held liable for injuries caused by attractive nuisances on their property. If a child enters a property because of an attractive nuisance and is injured by that nuisance, the child can sue the property owner for compensation if the following conditions are met:

1. The property owner knows or should know that children are likely to trespass
2. The landowner knows or should know the nuisance involves an unreasonable risk of death or serious harm to a child
3. Children can be unlikely to realize the danger they are in by coming near the nuisance
4. The burden on the property owner of protecting against the danger is minimal compared to the risk to children
5. The landowner fails to take reasonable measures to eliminate the danger or protect children from harm

(Garcia v. Soogian (1959) 52 Cal.2d 107, 110.)

“A possessor of land is subject to liability for bodily harm to young children trespassing thereon caused by a structure or other artificial condition which he maintains upon the land, if the place where the condition is maintained is one upon which the possessor knows or should know that such children are likely to trespass.” (Garcia, at 110.)

Consult with an experienced premises liability attorney to determine whether the conditions are met for a lawsuit against a property owner.

‍

California Courts Evaluate Attractive Nuisance Cases Based on Principles of Negligence

California courts analyze cases involving injured children under the broad rules of premises liability and negligence. The key question in these cases is whether the property owner failed to exercise reasonable care in maintaining their property, particularly when it was foreseeable that a child could be harmed.

For example, in Reynolds v. Willson (1958) 51 Cal.2d 94, the court found a property owner liable for injuries sustained by a child who was burned while playing near an incinerator. The court reasoned that the owner should have anticipated that children might be attracted to the hazardous condition.

In Beauchamp v. Los Gatos Golf Course (1969) 273 Cal.App.2d 20, the court considered whether a property owner could be responsible for failing to fence off an area that posed risks to children. The case reaffirmed that while California does not strictly adhere to the traditional attractive nuisance doctrine, foreseeability of harm and reasonable steps to prevent injury remain key factors in determining liability.

Finally, in McDaniel v. Sunset Manor Co. (1990) 220 Cal.App.3d 1, parents sued their landlord when their child almost drowned in a nearby creek after wandering through a hole in a fence separating their apartment building from the creek. In allowing recovery for the child’s off-site injuries, the court found the landlord had a duty to keep the fence on its property in good condition.

‍

A property owner’s duty to maintain their property in a safe condition extends to children who may enter the property, whether by invitation or trespass. Children are not held to the same standards of behavior as adults. A property owner must anticipate how children may interact with the property and take reasonable steps to protect them from harm.

‍

Examples of Attractive Nuisances

Although California law does not explicitly use the term "attractive nuisance," certain hazardous conditions have been found to create liability risks for property owners, especially when children are involved. Common examples include:

• Swimming Pools: Unfenced or unsecured pools pose drowning hazards to young children who may wander onto a property.
• Trampolines: Unfenced trampolines can attract children and lead to injury. 
• Skateboard Ramps: An unattended skateboard ramp can invite children and lead to foreseeable injury. 
• Construction Sites: Open trenches, scaffolding, power tools, and heavy machinery can attract curious children who may not understand the dangers.
• Abandoned Structures: An old structure, garage, or cabin can fall into disrepair and pose risks to children.
• Unattended Vehicles: A parked car with keys inside or an unlocked trunk can create serious risks for children who climb inside.
• Refrigerators or Appliances: Old refrigerators, freezers, or similar objects left outside can trap children inside, leading to suffocation.
• Exposed Electrical Equipment: Unsecured electrical boxes, power lines, or generators can be highly dangerous to children who might unknowingly touch them.

‍

What Should Property Owners Do to Avoid Harm to Children?

To minimize the risk of liability for child injuries, property owners in California should take proactive safety measures, such as:

• Installing fences and gates around swimming pools, construction sites, or other hazardous areas.
• Locking dangerous equipment or keeping it out of children's reach.
• Posting clear warning signs around potential dangers.
• Removing hazardous debris or abandoned appliances from the property.
• Ensuring adequate supervision when children are present on the premises.

‍

‍

Was Your Child Injured by an Unsafe Condition? The Truth Demands Justice

If your child has been injured due to a dangerous condition on someone else’s property, you have legal options. At Hulburt Law Firm, we understand how devastating these injuries can be and are committed to seeking justice for injured children and their families. Our experienced trial attorneys, Conor and Leslie Hulburt, have a proven track record of holding negligent property owners accountable. You can visit us at San Diego Premises Liability Attorneys to learn more about our approach to premises cases and our past results. 

Contact us today for a free consultation to discuss your case. We will fight for the justice your child deserves because – The Truth Demands Justice.

‍

Related Content:

• Negligence in Premises Liability Cases: When Property Owners Fail to Keep You Safe
• The Role of Premises Liability Attorneys in San Diego

‍