Bucki v. Hawkins

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• stating that “statutory immunity cannot attach when property is not held open to the public for recreational activity”
• stating, in dicta, that because the legislation’s stated intent is to encourage owners to open their properties to the public for recreational use, it would be “absurd” to shield owners from liability for injuries suffered by guests
• \[S]tatutory immunity cannot attach when property is not held open to the public for recreational activity.\
• \To determine whether limited immunity under the Recreational Use Statute extends . . . we must look to the statute as a whole.\
• “It would be both absurd and contrary to the Legislature’s stated intent to shield every landowner from liability for injuries that guests suffer while engaging in recreational activity on their property.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).