Cyber Attacks On Banks More Serious Than Public Realizes
E&O Insights: Restaurant and Tavern Risks
CEA’s First CIO Reflects C-Suite Trend
Golf and Country Clubs Weather the Storm
Midwest AGs Go After Storm-Chasing Roofing Companies
Medical Malpractice Payouts Not Driving Up Health Costs: Study
Florida Lawmakers Approve Medical Malpractice Reform
Industry Results Show Positive Signs for Workers’ Comp Line, NCCI’s Chief Economist SaysFree Newsletters
Sign up to receive insurance news alerts!Most Popular
Current Issue
Editors and Contributors
-
Andrea WellsAgency Compensation Playbook: 2013 Agency Salary Survey -
Andrew G. SimpsonHow Process Improvement Drives Agency Profitability -
Stephanie JonesThe Acquisition Cycle -
Don JerglerIndustry Predictions -
Chris BurandReasonable Compensation -
Andrea WellsPersonal Lines: How Technology is Changing the Way Agents Do Business
I suppose the landowner might bear SOME responsibility if he invited the man to camp there and gave permission to start fires.
Maybe some owner liability if he invited the man to stay and camp there, and gave permission to have fires.
How does anyone not know that a fire can cause damage?
I suspect the “deep pocket” theory might prevail here if the there is any documentation that the lot owner failed to keep the weeds down afer being warned of the hazard.
but how is it that the property owners didn’t have sufficient defensible space around their own homes? couldn’t they clearly see the hazard? what steps had the city taken to make sure the property wasn’t a hazard for the community?