Top Law Schools

I thought trespass to land has to be intentional, but my PMBR book says it could be negligent or reckless. So for example, if you are negligent with your lawn mower and it goes to your neighbor's yard, you are liable, according to PMBR.
However, I am pretty sure trespass to land has to be intentional. in fact, I looked it up on wikipedia and it says intentional.
my PMBR book is from 2006 so maybe it's outdated. did the law change since then?
should i spend more $ and get more recent edition?

you have to intend to go onto the land, which doesn't require having knowledge you're trespassing. did the book mean if you're mowing but negligent as to where the property line is?

Yeah, another way of thinking about it is you just have to intend to put one foot in front of the other. Your knowledge as to the boundaries of land, etc. are irrelevant. If you are involuntarily pushed onto another's land, you have not trespassed.

AReasonableMan wrote:you have to intend to go onto the land, which doesn't require having knowledge you're trespassing. did the book mean if you're mowing but negligent as to where the property line is?

no,
they said someone forgets to turn off his lawn mower or something. the lawn mower drives itself onto neighbor's property. that's trespass because trespass does not have to be intentional, it can be due to negligence or recklessness.

pmbr just sucks, I dont know what all the hype was about.

unclej wrote:

AReasonableMan wrote:you have to intend to go onto the land, which doesn't require having knowledge you're trespassing. did the book mean if you're mowing but negligent as to where the property line is?

no,
they said someone forgets to turn off his lawn mower or something. the lawn mower drives itself onto neighbor's property. that's trespass because trespass does not have to be intentional, it can be due to negligence or recklessness.

pmbr just sucks, I dont know what all the hype was about.

If you were driving on a road too fast and Dukes of Hazzard jump onto someone's land as a result accidentally that would likely satisfy the intent requirement through recklessness.

As far as that lawnmower hypo, it would be reckless to leave a lawn mower running with it subsequently running onto a neighbor's property. I guess the materials are treating the lawnmower as an instrumentality of the tortfeasor, which makes sense.

Really trespass to land doesn't come up much practically unless there's damage to property or someone wants to get an injunction (if there's a substantial likelihood it'll happen). It's just not worth it to sue for nominal damages unless it's worth it to a plaintiff to get a boundary line clear.