Basinger v.

Baldwin

Ms. Kathy Basinger was a social worker for Los Angeles County in California.
She worked for the school system and was given the task of visiting the homes of truant
students. One sunny morning this past spring, she was asked to visit the home of Paris
Baldwin who had been absent for 22 days during the previous quarter. The house was a
small ranch style house located in a suburb outside L.A.

She parked her car in the street in front of the house and walked up the short
driveway to the front steps. She climbed the steps, approached the front door, and
knocked. An obviously annoyed man opened the door and, in response to Ms. Basinger,
identified himself as Paris’ father, Andy Baldwin. When Ms. Basinger told Mr. Baldwin
why she was visiting the home, he became irate. He began yelling at her, using
profanities and gesturing wildly with his arms. He said that it was the mother’s fault, not
his, that Paris was skipping school and he resented being questioned by someone from
the government about something that was not his fault. Baldwin finished by telling her to
leave and not bother him again.

Basinger realized she was going to get nowhere with Baldwin --- she felt it was
wise to leave the property as soon as possible given Baldwin’s anger toward her. She
turned, went down the steps and started walking briskly across the yard toward her car.
As she crossed the grass, she tripped over a five foot rake that had been left in the yard.
The rake had black tines and a long red handle. Basinger broke her arm in two places and
missed two months of work. She sued Baldwin, alleging that he had failed to keep a safe
premises and had failed to warn her of the dangerous condition.

The California Supreme Court concluded that Basinger’s claim should be

dismissed. The court stated:

Generally, a landowner has a duty to keep his premises in a safe

condition and to warn guests of a hazardous condition. However, where
the hazardous condition is apparent to anyone looking, the landowner has
no duty to warn of its presence and cannot be held responsible for any
injuries suffered by a guest as a result of the condition. Even when on
another’s property, an individual has a duty to use ordinary care to prevent
injury to himself. This includes a duty to keep a proper lookout. Here, we
do not doubt that the plaintiff failed to see the rake. However, any person,
using ordinary care and keeping a proper lookout would have undoubtedly
seen the rake given its size and color. Consequently, we cannot hold the
landowner responsible for plaintiff’s injuries.