Helpful Hints
  • (1) You can search the entire content of Dean’s by phrase or by individual words. Just type your keywords into the search box and then pull down the search icon on the right and choose the option you need: search by word or by phrase or reset the content.
  • (2) Double click on a word in the content of a definition, and if the word is listed as a keyword in Dean’s, it will look that word up.
  • (3) You can use the search function to help jump the scrolling function. Simply type the first 2-3 letters into the search box then hit enter on your keyboard and the scroll will go to those Keywords that begin with those letters and allow you to scroll from there.

Public policy implications underlie the law of premises liability. In Vermont, a business owner has a duty 'of active care to make sure that its premises are in safe and suitable condition for its customers.' Debus v. Grand Union Stores 159 Vt. 537, 546, 621 A.2d 1288, 1294 (1993). This duty of care where the defendant's routine business practice creates a foreseeable hazard for its customers. Id.; see also Forcier v. Grand Union Stores Inc. 128 Vt. 389, 394, 264 A.2d 796, 799 (1970) (self-service). The business invitee 'has a right to assume that the premises, aside from obvious dangers, [are] reasonably safe for the purpose for which he [is] upon them, and that proper precaution [has] been taken to make them so.' Garafano v. Neshobe Beach Club, 126 Vt. 566, 572, 238 A.2d 70, 75 (1967). A ski area owes its customers the same duty as any other business -- to keep its premises reasonably safe. Stearns v. Sugarbush Valley Corp., 130 Vt. 472, 474, 296 A.2d 220, 222 (1972).

The policy rationale is to place responsibility for maintenance of the land on those who own or control it, with the ultimate goal ...

Register or login to access full content