Also known as: trespass law · trespass
Written by attorneys · grounded in primary & secondary sources — see below
Liability imposed on one who intentionally enters land in the possession of another or causes a thing or third person to do so, or remains on the land, or fails to remove a thing under a duty to remove, irrespective of harm to any legally protected interest of the possessor.
Laura Lewis received permission from the owner to retrieve tools from a trailer office only during daytime hours. After dark she removed a board nailed over a side window and inserted a pry bar through the gap to reach a locked safe inside the residential portion. The owner had not authorized entry by force or at night. The nighttime forcible entry into the separately secured area constitutes a trespass.
Luis Lopez believed a neighbor's fence had been moved onto his own lot and erected a new barrier to reclaim the strip. When the neighbor attempted to cross the disputed line to retrieve equipment, Luis used physical force to block the path. The neighbor was not exposing Luis to serious bodily harm. The use of force to terminate the entry onto Luis's land is justifiable.
Select any source to read its text and confirm it supports the definition.
Landon Long directed employees to drive posts into the seabed and moor boats that crossed the surveyed boundary onto Lillian Locke's waterfront parcel. Long knew the location of the markers when issuing the instructions. The posts and boats occupied space within Locke's possession without permission. Long is subject to liability for trespass even though no physical damage occurred.
Logan Lane discovered a stranger inside a gated storage yard after hours and knew that forcing the intruder out through a narrow exit would expose the person to a substantial risk of serious injury from falling debris. Lane refrained from using physical force to eject the trespasser. The known danger precludes justification of force to terminate the trespass.
Lucas Lee walked across a corner of a privately owned field to take a shortcut, believing the owner would not mind and causing no damage to crops or soil. The owner had posted no-trespassing signs and had not granted permission. Lee's intentional presence on the land subjects him to liability for trespass regardless of the absence of harm.
Lakeshore Industries placed a temporary storage container on a lot with the owner's consent for a one-week construction project. After the project ended and consent was revoked, the company left the container in place for two additional months. The continued presence after termination of the privilege constitutes a trespass.
No. Liability attaches upon intentional entry onto land in the possession of another even when the presence causes no harm to the land or the possessor.
Supporting sources
Consent limited to certain times or places does not authorize entry by force at other times, and consent procured by fraud or threats is ineffective, so the entry remains trespassory.
Supporting sources
No. The use of force to prevent or terminate a trespass is not justifiable if the actor knows that exclusion will expose the trespasser to substantial danger of serious bodily harm.
Supporting sources
Yes. Objective probable cause for trespass based on facts known at the time validates the arrest regardless of the offense label officers initially stated.
Supporting sources
Yes. One who intentionally causes a third person to enter land in the possession of another is subject to liability for trespass.
Supporting sources
…recently and most aptly observed: "[Appellant's] claim in this case amounts to no less than a suggestion that the common law of trespass is not subject to revision by the State . . . . If accepted, that claim would represent a return to the era of Lochner v. New York , 198 U. S. 45 (1905), when common-law rights were also…