Latest Headlines
- Homeowner Reportedly Opens Fire On Known Attackers In Bratt Assault
- FPL Seeks To Raise Bills For All Of 2025 To Cover Hurricane Costs; Here’s How Much
- Cat Country 98.7 Is The 2024 CMA Radio Station Of The Year (With Gallery)
- Gonzalez Man Gets Two Life Sentences For Abusing Children
- ECUA Employee Golf Tournament Raises $10K For Children’s Hospital
- Creative Painting: Squeegee Art Saturday At Century Library
- Eagles Vs. Eagles: Ernest Ward Middle Falls To W.S. Neal
- Cantonment Man Sentenced To 25 Years For Child Sex Abuse
- One Airlifted After Highway 97 Rear End Crash
- Semi, Pickup Crash Closes Highway 29 For Hours In Cantonment
Senate Looks At Limiting Landowner Liability For Hunting, Fishing
October 20, 2011
A Senate committee Wednesday began moving forward with a bill that would limit the legal liability of landowners who allow people to use their property for hunting, fishing and wildlife viewing.
Supporters said the bill, which is part of a package of legislative proposals by the Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission, could help encourage more people to enjoy the outdoors.
“One of the things that keeps people from opening up their lands is they’re afraid of being sued,” said Sen. Steve Oelrich, R-Gainesville.
But the proposal also faced questions from some lawmakers and the Florida Justice Association, which represents trial lawyers.
Sen. Nancy Detert, R-Venice, questioned whether guests on the land would also have liability protections for damage they might unintentionally cause. “You just can’t have one side give up their rights and not the other side,” she said.
The Senate Environmental Preservation and Conservation Committee introduced the bill and will have to bring it up again before voting.
By The News Service of Florida
Comments
3 Responses to “Senate Looks At Limiting Landowner Liability For Hunting, Fishing”
REGARDING:
“the proposal also faced questions from some lawmakers and the Florida Justice Association, which represents trial lawyers.”
“Sen. Nancy Detert, R-Venice, questioned whether guests on the land would also have liability protections for damage they might unintentionally cause. “You just can’t have one side give up their rights and not the other side,” she said.”
Of course trial lawyers oppose it, where will they earn money if law suits are limited to reasonable cause?
It is interesting that Nancy believes people should not be free from liability from allowing people access to their property unless those people were free from liability for what they did while enjoying that access.
IMAGINE:
“Sure was nice of Farmer Jones to let us cross his land to get to the creek.”
“Yeah, and while we’re at it, let’s shoot his cow.”
Interesting attitude which would permit the first only if it permitted the second.
David for those seeking reasonable protection
to acts of kindness, not acts of evil
I remember a time when landowners would allow public access to swimming holes. It seems as time passed the public evolved into an out of control bunch of hooligans, that would litter and destroy, and just cause trouble in general. They will injure themselves and attempt to sue the property owner, It is no wonder gates are up and locked.
Sen. Nancy Detert is wrong. Should people be so nice as to allow you
to hunt their land and you shoot to close to the house and hit it. WHO in
the heck does she think should pay for that DAMAGE?
One is not the same as the other. THAT kind of stupid mentality by
law makers is why we can never get anything done. THAT and the
fact that Lawyers are just looking for someone to sue somebody
because they get a third or better, that’s a real big incentive!