OtherPapers.com - Other Term Papers and Free Essays
Search

Garrett Court Case Memo

Essay by   •  February 6, 2017  •  Essay  •  1,076 Words (5 Pages)  •  1,521 Views

Essay Preview: Garrett Court Case Memo

Report this essay
Page 1 of 5

The courts first require that the area or structure beyond the main habitation be secured. Newcomb, 403 N.2d at 422; Garrett, 395 N.2d at 110; Correia, 387 N.2d at 356. A place is secured when measures have been taken to exclude the general public. Garrett, 395 N.2d at 110; see Correia, 387 N.2d at 356; Davids, 380 N.2d at 114. Such measures are physical impediments of some type which deter outsiders from entering. See Newcomb, 403 N.2d at 422; Garrett, 395 N.2d at 110; Correia, 387 N.2d at 356. This gives residents a sense of protection from outsiders similar to what they would feel in a main house, which contributes to the reasonable perception that the area is part of the dwelling unit. See Newcomb, 403 N.2d at 422; Garrett, 395 N.2d at 110; Correia, 387 N.2d at 356.

In Garrett, the court found that a parking garage on the grounds of a multi-unit apartment complex had physical impediments that sufficiently deterred the general public. 395 N.2d at 109, 110. Tenants had electronic transmitters to open the garage door, and therefore, the garage was secured. See id. In Correia, a summer house was secured because the structure had sufficient physical impediments to deter the public from entering. See 387 N.2d at 356. The summer house had screen windows and was connected to the house by an enclosed, screened walkway. Id. However, in Newcomb, a gazebo was not secured because the measures taken were not sufficient to exclude the general public. See 403 N.2d at 422. The gazebo was posted with “No Trespassing” signs. Id. Implicit in the court’s conclusion was that the signs were not physical impediments and therefore the residents would not have a sense of protection similar to what they would feel in the home. See id.

In the Fenton case the court would likely conclude…???

Second, the courts require that the area or structure in question is used for activities central to domestic life (Garrett, 110; Correia, 356; Davids 115). Courts consider a place central to domestic life when it is used for at least one activity that is typically done in a room in the home and the area functions like a room in the home (Garrett, 110; Correia, 356; Davids, 115). This contributes to the residents’ reasonable expectation of repose in their habitation because of the reasonable perception that the area is part of the dwelling unit. (Garrett, 110; Correia, 356; Davids, 114).

In Correia, the summer house was deemed central to domestic life because it was used for activities such as watching television and reading, which are activities typically performed in the home (Correia, 356). The shed in Davids was also considered used for activities central for domestic life because it was used to store frozen food and canned goods, which are activities typically done in a room in the home (Davids, 115). Although the shed also stored power tools, a lawn mower, and gardening equipment, because it was used for at least one activity typically done in the room of a home, it was considered central to domestic life. In Garrett, however, the court ruled that the parking garage of a multi-tenant apartment building was

...

...

Download as:   txt (6.1 Kb)   pdf (44.4 Kb)   docx (9.4 Kb)  
Continue for 4 more pages »
Only available on OtherPapers.com