Abel, Baker and Charlie went hiking and lost direction, but despite breaking the law of trespass, they suffered a huge loss, it was the death of Abel and Baker’s broken leg. This therefore, raises a possible scenario that both parties will take legal action against each other. This is a discussion of possible causes of action and responses that may be taken by both sides.

The owner of the land may file a legal suit against the three boys, accusing them of trespass on his private property. A trespasser is an individual or a group of individuals who enters the property of another without permission, or legal authority (WiseGeek, 2013). Following this definition, Abel, Baker, and Charlie are guilty of trespass, punishable by jail or fine under the law. However, the boys can defend themselves that there was no sign showing that the land they entered after loosing direction was private, as required by the Law of Land Ownership. The owner can also sue Charlie for destroying his property following the huge fire that consumed 20 acres of his land. Charlie can however, defend himself that it was an accident due to panic as a result of his friend’s falling into a hole.

The boys can also sue the owner of the land of negligence on two grounds. First, he ignored the law that requires marking of private land by fencing or by placing a warning sign. Secondly, the owner abandoned the hole, which was the reason of Abel’s death, this is a case of negligence. However, the owner can defend himself that he had marked his land and that there was a clear pathway out of his land. This is because Baker came upon a "Private Land. Keep Off", as he was looking for help. Following the report that Abel’s life could have been saved if only help arrived earlier, the owner can also be accused of the third degree murder because he refused to help Baker with his phone, i.e.to call for help.

As the legal advisor (attorney general) of the landowner, I would not agree to pay the litigation fees in waiting for later compensation under the condition that the owner wins the case and there are financial rewards. This is because there are chances that he may lose the case suit against the three boys since the loss of human life cannot be compared to trespass and damage of property. Such an arrangement is however permitted in court cases, depending on the negotiation terms between the defendant and his advisor and when paid fees are recoverable; but only in the event of a prevailing decision with a monetary award to the individual represented.

Order now

Related essays