Release of Liability Form

[ApproachingLight]

My understanding is different.

In Brenda's case her ex may have had someone sign a hold harmless but there is a different element here. He chose/agreed for a price to work on another's personal property. But more, the other party agreed to have the tow done because of the expectation that the ex would do what he said he would do without any damage. Sometimes called the "prudent man principle." In other words, he is being held to a standard that is normally acceptable and expected for towing someone.

Here, this contract to hike is fine. You are not telling the property owner you will take control of their property and fix it. In fact you are saying the opposite. You are acknowledging it is their land and that you are entering it. You acknowledge inherent dangers and hold them "not liable," "blameless," and "harmless." Three times. If was to add anything it would be personal property. Liability involves injury or loss to both a person and their possessions. so...

In signing this form, I __________________ , agree not to hold ____________________ liable for any bodily or personal property injury, loss, damage, or accident that I might encounter while hiking on his/her privately owned property.

I would add one more sentence that doesn't need to be in there at all but shows intent. Something like this is a nice no-garbage-leaving gesture...

Further it is my intent to leave the premises much as i found it, respecting the environment and attempting to leave no personal imprint.

Ooops, sorry. one more. You need to make this document time bound. For a day, a week, a summer, whatever. david

[Kelly]

Excellent post, David! Great insight!

You are not telling the property owner you will take control of their property and fix it.

And Kyle, feel free to hike on my property any time you like, but I'd like the contract to state that you will fix it! (I'd really like a pond, if you can get to that right away.)

[hobkyl]

Hmm...ok David. I had that in there originally but took it out because I didn't think it was necessary in my situation.

Again, I would never have the intention to sue anyone for my own carelessness or act uncontrollable by man. For me its just that extra step, to get onto new land and see a new falls. Out of a dozen or so land owners I've gained permission to hike their property, only 2 have requested such a release.

Please feel free to bolster this document as you see fit.

Kelly...Ill get right on that. Ill put in a screened in gazebo too so you can enjoy that pond without being pestered by mosquitos.

[Brenda]

Yes David, I said that my situation was different. However, to clarify, he wasn't charging for any services in these situations. It was more of a good Samaritan thing. My point was that, at the time I was told that those agreements in general don't hold water. I know that none of us would ever do such a thing, but let's say that I have a signed agreement with a landowner, as above. I'm hiking and I slip and break an arm. Can I then turn around and hold the landowner liable regardless because I was granted permission?

[hobkyl]

It basically comes down to the integrity of the person. Why would you sue if you signed it? However, I agree someone out there most likely would...and if it doesnt hold up in court...then I dont think as NYFalls it should be offered...because that would most likely lead to being sued as well.

I think unless someone has the ability/desire to research this further through the legal chains maybe we should remove this post? I was simply sharing what Ive been using and for my purposes it serves well. Should I get hurt on someones land I would use my insurance to pay for my treatment. The first release I wrote was for Kashong, the owner asked for a simple note stating that I didnt hold him responsible. So in my mind since he as the owner requested it, he was legally protecting himself and I was cool with it.

[ApproachingLight]

Brenda, i do think this form with the changes is pretty complete. As a former insurance guy the only exception I can think of where you could sue a landowner is what is called an "attractive nuisance." You can look it up (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Attractive_nuisance) rather than waste time here.

When you hear people say that these don't hold up in court, think it through. A parking lot ticket in tiny print on the back says they are not liable for anything; a ski ticket says it on the back of their day passes, etc. The huge difference is the normal expectation. You expect you car to be safe, the chair lift to work. In both cases the payment of money is for an expectation. Also you never signed anything. It was a forced one-way agreement that most courts will acknowledge no ever reads much less understands.

This agreement i feel is firm. It is simple, you are not paying anything to the landowner, you acknowledge dangers, the landowner has no responsibility to you that is either given OR expected. One other big difference. You are signing it. Contracts can be implied by virtue of payment, they can be verbal, and they can be written. No question a written document is the strongest, and this shows the hikers intent. Don't know how a court could reward a hiker with this for anything, less the "attractive nuisance" issue.

My two cents. Great document with time-bound change and personal property change. david

[Matt]

Is this the latest copy?

In signing this form, I __________________ , agree not to hold ____________________ liable for any bodily or personal property injury, loss, damage, or accident that I might encounter while hiking on his/her privately owned property.

I would add one more sentence that doesn't need to be in there at all but shows intent. Something like this is a nice no-garbage-leaving gesture...

Further it is my intent to leave the premises much as i found it, respecting the environment and attempting to leave no personal imprint.

And what outstanding issues should we address, aside from adding date/time?

[hobkyl]

Im good with it. Anyone else?

Funny today I received a response from one of the people I sent a request to...and their response read something like "our attorney suggests that under no conditions you or no other non resident be allowed on our property. The property is posted and trespassers will be prosecuted."

He went on to cc another land owner that I had requested permission from that lives a few miles south of himself. THANKS

A) why would you need to ask your attorney if someone should be allowed on your property? Isn't that your choice?

B) why with an offer to supply a release of liability...would an attorney care?

(I hadn't actually supplied a release yet...just made the offer to furnish one if desired)

Luckily, I did receive permission from 2 other land owners along Owasco Lake however...so all his not lost.