Engelson (Cole) v. State

How courts have described this case

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

• holding town not reckless even though it could have improved lighting and placed warning signs on hazardous pathway
• erecting a gate across a bicycle path, which the plaintiff crashed into, without warning signs or lights, not reckless conduct for purposes of recreational use statute
• regarding the construction of a gate across a pathway without lights or warning signs, the court stated that the city was not reckless in expecting the public to take care in navigating after dark on roads in a park which the plaintiff knew to contain traffic gates
• “Members of the public who enter the park to engage in [recreational, charitable, or religious] activities are therefore lawfully in the park as recreational users”
• “As to trespassers, landowners continue to owe the duty only to refrain from wilful, wanton, or reckless disregard for their safely”
• installation of large metal gate across path opening without warning signs or lighting did not give rise to potential for death or grave bodily injury

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).