Harrop v. Campbell
This text of 618 P.2d 321 (Harrop v. Campbell) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Idaho Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
Plaintiff appellants appeal from a district court summary judgment dismissing plaintiffs’ claim for damages. Plaintiff Thelma Harrop was injured while descending the front steps of defendants’ home after having made a social and religious visit. The trial court concluded that there were no material issues of fact and, based upon the record presented below, ruled that the plaintiffs were “licensees” as a matter of law, relying on our decision in Wilson v. Bogert, 81 Idaho 535, 347 P.2d 341 (1959). The court further ruled that the defendants “violated no duty owed to plaintiffs.”
We affirm. Springer v. Pearson, 96 Idaho 477, 531 P.2d 567 (1975). Costs to respondents.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
618 P.2d 321, 101 Idaho 580, 1980 Ida. LEXIS 572, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/harrop-v-campbell-idaho-1980.