Conant v. Stroup

How courts have described this case

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

• finding persuasive courts’ near-uniform determination that recreational use statutes based on model act effectuate their purpose by restricting protection to landowners who allow recreational use of their land by members of general public
• plaintiff, who was injured while jogging on defendant’s land, was using defendant’s land for recreational purposes
• “If private landowners make their land available to the general public * * *.”
• “If private landowners will make their lands available to the general public for recreational purposes, the state will ‘trade’ that public access for immunity from liability that might result from the use of the property.” (Emphasis omitted.)
• “the model act expressed a basic quid pro quo in its declaration of policy, namely, permission to the general public to use private land for recreational purposes in exchange for immunity from liability for resulting injuries”
• “the model act expressed a basic quid pro quo in its declaration of policy, namely, permission to the general public to use private land for recreational purposes in exchange for immunity from liability for resulting injuries”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).