Benham v. Morton & Furbish Agency, 929 A.2d 471 (2007)
- Citation
- Benham v. Morton & Furbish Agency, 929 A.2d 471 (2007)
- Parent Document
- Benham v. Morton & Furbish Agency, 929 A.2d 471 (2007)
- Jurisdiction
- Maine (state)
- Effective Date
- 2007-07-10
Other Sections in This Document (29)
- Benham v. Morton & Furbish Agency, 929 A.2d 471 (2007)
- Benham v. Morton & Furbish Agency, 929 A.2d 471 (2007)
- Benham v. Morton & Furbish Agency, 929 A.2d 471 (2007)
- Benham v. Morton & Furbish Agency, 929 A.2d 471 (2007)
- Benham v. Morton & Furbish Agency, 929 A.2d 471 (2007)
- Benham v. Morton & Furbish Agency, 929 A.2d 471 (2007)
- Benham v. Morton & Furbish Agency, 929 A.2d 471 (2007)
- Benham v. Morton & Furbish Agency, 929 A.2d 471 (2007)
- Benham v. Morton & Furbish Agency, 929 A.2d 471 (2007)
- Benham v. Morton & Furbish Agency, 929 A.2d 471 (2007)
- Benham v. Morton & Furbish Agency, 929 A.2d 471 (2007)
- Benham v. Morton & Furbish Agency, 929 A.2d 471 (2007)
- Benham v. Morton & Furbish Agency, 929 A.2d 471 (2007)
- Benham v. Morton & Furbish Agency, 929 A.2d 471 (2007)
- Benham v. Morton & Furbish Agency, 929 A.2d 471 (2007)
- Benham v. Morton & Furbish Agency, 929 A.2d 471 (2007)
- Benham v. Morton & Furbish Agency, 929 A.2d 471 (2007)
- Benham v. Morton & Furbish Agency, 929 A.2d 471 (2007)
- Benham v. Morton & Furbish Agency, 929 A.2d 471 (2007)
- Benham v. Morton & Furbish Agency, 929 A.2d 471 (2007)
- Benham v. Morton & Furbish Agency, 929 A.2d 471 (2007)
- Benham v. Morton & Furbish Agency, 929 A.2d 471 (2007)
- Benham v. Morton & Furbish Agency, 929 A.2d 471 (2007)
- Benham v. Morton & Furbish Agency, 929 A.2d 471 (2007)
- Benham v. Morton & Furbish Agency, 929 A.2d 471 (2007)
- Benham v. Morton & Furbish Agency, 929 A.2d 471 (2007)
- Benham v. Morton & Furbish Agency, 929 A.2d 471 (2007)
- Benham v. Morton & Furbish Agency, 929 A.2d 471 (2007)
- Benham v. Morton & Furbish Agency, 929 A.2d 471 (2007)
Full Text
550 chars[¶ 12] Benham argues that the court erroneously concluded that the relationship between the Carons and Blevins was that of a landlord and tenant when it reasoned that no duty of care was owed to prevent Benham’s injuries. We address in turn: (A) the standard of review for summary judgment on the duty of care to an occupant; (B) how the duty of care is affected by the distinction between a tenancy and a license; and (C) whether the rental of the Caron cottage created a lease to the premises or a license to use the premises. A. Standard of Review