Registered: Oct 2006
Location: MIFFLINTOWN,PA.
Posts: 563

If you don’t know ask, so here we go. If a person was to take a youngster hunting with them and that youngster got seriously hurt while hunting with you who would be responsible for the persons injury lets just say there is no insurance involved.

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Nov 2021
Location: MO
Posts: 213

I have been told by my insurance company and my lawyer that the land owner(if it happens while out on the hunt), the operator of the vehicle( if it involves a vehicle), the party who has accepted responsibility for the minor, or the minor's parents can be held responsible. Anybody can sue anybody for anything. The lawyer would probably go after the deepest pockets with the best insurance. If there is no insurance, they would probably go after the person they could put the most liability on. I'm sure this varies from state to state and with each situation. I have been told that it depends a lot on the judge as well.

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Nov 2011
Location: Freeport,TX
Posts: 2011

Hopefully no one will file a lawsuit…I am sure this is a good reason why many land owners won’t give permission…

__________________
Training dogs is not so much about quantity, it's more about timing, and the right situations...After that it's up to the dog....A hunting dog is born...

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Oct 2006
Location: MIFFLINTOWN,PA.
Posts: 563

quote:

---

Originally posted by MOcoondogs
I have been told by my insurance company and my lawyer that the land owner(if it happens while out on the hunt), the operator of the vehicle( if it involves a vehicle), the party who has accepted responsibility for the minor, or the minor's parents can be held responsible. Anybody can sue anybody for anything. The lawyer would probably go after the deepest pockets with the best insurance. If there is no insurance, they would probably go after the person they could put the most liability on. I'm sure this varies from state to state and with each situation. I have been told that it depends a lot on the judge as well.

---

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Nov 2021
Location: MO
Posts: 213

I try to make sure I know who I'm taking hunting and the parents. I try to always be safe. These are the things I can do. Everything else I turn over to God and pray continually that he leads me to the right decisions. I try to make sure my heart is in the right place to glorify Him and not myself when I am taking a new hunter or anytime I go hunting.

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Dec 2006
Location: Springfield, Ga.
Posts: 4254

It depends more on the political landscape of the state than the incident. In Democratic states, if the person who took the minor out was a second amendment user, he would be crucified by whatever means possible. If in the Republican states, its likely they could not agree on how to pursue it, and the youngster will probably be an old person before the thing could be settled.

__________________
Robert " Rock" Johnson

Johnson Creek Kennels
home of:
UKC Grand Nite Champion "PR" Yadkin River Addkis. Deceased 12/11/2016 RIP

2009/2010/2011/2012 AKC GA. State Leader and Supreme Grand Nite Champion Yadkin River Addkis

2010 ACHA Georgia State Champion Grand Nite Champion Yadkin River Addkis

PKC Champion Yadkin River Addkis

Bright Eye Lights


Treeing Walkers

912-663-5287 cell (perfered)

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Jul 2006
Location: Deputy, Indiana
Posts: 426

Indiana has an agri tourism law that takes liability away from the land owner.

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Dec 2003
Location: Sheridan, WY
Posts: 1166

There is never an automatic situation where someone is liable for another's injuries... a landowner, hunting guide, hunting buddy, whoever..... would have to intentionally try to hurt someone, or create a risk / hazard through negligence. And even at that.. it's not some automatic situation... someone has to sue the person and convince a judge of the persons fault. This of course assuming it's not a criminal act.

The idea that "everyone is getting sued all the time" is a myth. It has made people (like landowners) too nervous when they shouldn't be.

__________________
______________________________
Seeking Soli Deo Gloria through the hounds.

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Aug 2014
Location: WI
Posts: 437

landowners are not liable if land is used for recreation in wisconsin. State Law.

__________________
I have my best hound now. Cricket out of Moonlight/Outlaw Mac by Feldmans Roxie,

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Nov 2011
Location: Freeport,TX
Posts: 2011

quote:

---

Originally posted by Black Ash Bawl
landowners are not liable if land is used for recreation in wisconsin. State Law.

---

__________________
Training dogs is not so much about quantity, it's more about timing, and the right situations...After that it's up to the dog....A hunting dog is born...

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Oct 2006
Location: MIFFLINTOWN,PA.
Posts: 563

quote:

---

Originally posted by Black Ash Bawl
landowners are not liable if land is used for recreation in wisconsin. State Law.

---

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Dec 2003
Location: Sheridan, WY
Posts: 1166

There are really bounteous variables to determine who is liable. Your question is probably way to vague to answer. Is there a specific incident you are asking about?

__________________
______________________________
Seeking Soli Deo Gloria through the hounds.

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Apr 2015
Location: church hill tn
Posts: 5738

Sadly, these questions pose the problems one has to consider while being a helpful person in taking a minor hunting. While the risks may be small there are definite risks, such as accidents in the woods or automobiles. If you want to be a mentor to a minor hunting or otherwise, it would be a very good ideal to have a hold harmless agreement between you and the parent/s or guardian of the minor. Such a agreement would absolve you of accidents to the minor, but would still hold you liable for gross misconduct or intentional injuries. I always give the landowners that I hunt on a hold harmless for permission to hunt on their land. Hold harmless agreements absolve one of liability for accidents, but NOT for intentional or gross misconduct of a individual. Dave

__________________
Dave Richards Treeing Walkers Reg American Saddlebred and Registered Rocky Mt. Show Horses

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Apr 2015
Location: church hill tn
Posts: 5738

Sorry, double post. Dave

__________________
Dave Richards Treeing Walkers Reg American Saddlebred and Registered Rocky Mt. Show Horses

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: May 2006
Location: Livingston, WI
Posts: 101

Brian, you are responsible for yourself if you get hurt on someone else’s property, regardless of whether you have permission to be there or not. The only way a landowner is responsible is if they “set a trap” for whomever is coming on their land. For instance, you have a state funded snowmobile trail across your land. For whatever reason you get upset about it being there and decide to do something about it. You the landowner or an agent for yours strings a wire, rope or something across the marked trail. Someone gets hurt or worse, now you the landowner is liable.

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Aug 2014
Location: WI
Posts: 437

Answer: Under sec. 895.52 of the Wisconsin Statutes, landowners are generally immune from liability for injuries received by individuals recreating on their lands. This law provides liability protection to landowners for injury or death of individuals participating in outdoor recreation on their land. This includes activities such as fishing, hunting, trapping, hiking, camping, boating and berry-picking. This immunity does not apply when the landowner receives more than $2,000 a year in income from the recreation activity or when the landowner acted maliciously with an intent to harm the person recreating. There also is an exception for social guests invited specifically for an occasion on residential or platted property or property within 300 feet of a commercial building or structure. Courts have consistently interpreted this statute to protect landowners in furtherance of its purpose, which is to encourage landowners to allow others to recreate on their lands. This statute applies to the landowners of Managed Forest Law (MFL) lands as well.

__________________
I have my best hound now. Cricket out of Moonlight/Outlaw Mac by Feldmans Roxie,

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged