[Dion]

Are hotel resorts liable for Gator attacks

Courts in the Sunshine State have observed what most Floridians already know: alligators are native to Florida. Accordingly, landowners are not automatically required to have them "under dominion and control."

It's important to note that this wild animal doctrine certainly does not provide blanket immunity to a resort in a situation like this. Florida courts recognize that landowners may be negligent if they know or should know of an unreasonable risk of harm posed by an animal on their premises, and cannot expect patrons to realize the danger or guard against it.

So, for example, suppose a resort had a known infestation of fire ants, and failed to call pest control. Suppose also that patrons checking in and out of the hotel were not warned and had no reason to know that the hotel is in fire ant territory. Then suppose that the hotel knowingly leaves out food that might attract fire ants. That might be a case where the resort's negligence overcomes any protections of the wild animal doctrine.

The ferae naturae doctrine really only says that a resort or other landowner is not automatically liable for what wild animals on the property may do, but only so long as the animal is native, and the landowner didn't keep the animal as a hotel pet.

What if, as has been reported, Disney posted "No Swimming" signs? The signage will be critical, too. When it comes to alligator attacks, courts in Florida have held that a swimmer's disregard of "No Swimming" and other warning signs were the sole cause of the serious injuries.

Even with adequate signage and ferae naturae doctrine, a resort could still be liable in spite of all these protections, if it's flat-out negligent.

Resort liability in Florida for an alligator attack will depend on the specific facts -- not only the facts of the tragedy itself, but what the resort did and knew in advance about the alligators, and the likelihood of the harm.

http://www.cnn.com/2016/06/15/opinio...anny-cevallos/