Also known as: public lands · public domain
Written by attorneys · grounded in primary & secondary sources — see below
2 senses
Government-owned land held for public access or benefit. The status of the land as open to public use is a factor that can require a possessor to anticipate harm to invitees from known or obvious dangers.
Government-owned land held for public access or benefit. The status of the land as open to public use can supply a public forum for protected expression.
Government-owned land held for public access or benefit. The status of the land as open to public use is a factor that can require a possessor to anticipate harm to invitees from known or obvious dangers.
Select any source to read its text and confirm it supports the definition.
Government-owned land held for public access or benefit. The status of the land as open to public use can supply a public forum for protected expression.
Select any source to read its text and confirm it supports the definition.
Each sense below has its own examples, sources, and questions.
The City of Fairmont maintains a plaza next to city hall that is open daily to the public. Pierre Poulin, a visitor, sits on the narrow unguarded ledge of a shallow reflecting pool during lunch as many others do. He slips and fractures his wrist. Because the plaza is public land that invitees are entitled to use, the city should have anticipated the harm despite the obvious drop and may be liable for failing to take reasonable precautions.
The California Coastal Commission requires a public access easement across private beachfront property as a permit condition for new construction. Paul Peterson, the owner, challenges the condition as an unconstitutional taking. Public land-use regulations and the public-trust doctrine operate independently of private servitudes and do not create the same running obligations analyzed under servitude law.
The Nollans apply for a permit to build a larger home on their beachfront lot. The commission conditions approval on a lateral public access easement along the shore. Pearl Porter, a neighboring owner, supports the condition because it would preserve public use of the tidelands that function as public land under the public-trust doctrine.
No. When members of the public are entitled to use public land, that entitlement is an important factor indicating that the possessor should anticipate harm despite the obviousness of the danger. The duty of reasonable care therefore remains and may require additional precautions, warnings, or redesign of the area.
Supporting sources
No. Zoning, public-navigation servitudes, the public-trust doctrine, and related doctrines are excluded from the definition of servitudes. They operate as distinct public-law limitations rather than private running obligations.
Supporting sources
It can. When prior representation involved information about public land transactions or filings that later become part of the public record, the risk that confidential information will materially advance a new client's position may be reduced, though the substantial-relationship test still turns on factual overlap and the nature of the information actually obtained.
Supporting sources
Members of a church carry offensive signs on public land about 1,000 feet from a military funeral. Phuong Pham, a grieving family member, sees the signs and suffers severe emotional distress. The peaceful non-disruptive picketing on public land addresses matters of public concern and receives First Amendment protection that bars tort liability for intentional infliction of emotional distress.
A teenager burns a cross on public land in a residential neighborhood. The city enforces an ordinance banning cross burning as a form of fighting words. Priscilla Parks, the defendant, argues that the ordinance is viewpoint discriminatory because it singles out one type of symbolic speech while allowing other offensive expression on the same public land.
Members of a Native American church ingest peyote during a ceremony on federal public land. The state denies unemployment benefits after the participants are fired for violating drug laws. Paige Porter, a claimant, contends that the government's management of public lands must accommodate sincere religious practices under the Free Exercise Clause.
Yes. Peaceful, non-disruptive picketing on public land that addresses matters of public concern receives special First Amendment protection. Tort liability for intentional infliction of emotional distress is barred absent additional unprotected conduct.
Supporting sources
…its health and safety laws to conform to the diversity of religious belief, but should not have to tailor its management of public lands, Lyng, supra , or its administration of welfare programs, Roy, supra . [^maj-3]: Justice O’Connor suggests that “[t]here is nothing talismanic about neutral laws of general…