Security investigators document poor lighting and broken cameras in parking garage for liability evidence.

Premises Liability

When a Trespasser Is Injured on Your Property—Who's Liable?

Property owners have legal duties even to unauthorized visitors. Understand what Georgia law requires and when liability may apply.

By Peter F. Jaraysi · Published September 26, 2026

Trespasser Premises Liability: What Duty Does a Property Owner Owe?

Georgia property owners do not owe trespassers the same legal duty they owe to invited guests or customers—but they are not free from all responsibility either. Under Georgia law, property owners owe trespassers only the duty to refrain from willful or wanton injury. This means a property owner cannot deliberately harm a trespasser or act with reckless disregard for their safety, but is generally not required to make the property safe for unauthorized visitors or warn them of ordinary hazards. However, important exceptions exist, and a trespasser’s legal status can change depending on the property owner’s knowledge and conduct.

If you were injured on someone else's property—whether you were invited, permitted, or trespassing—the owner's knowledge and conduct matter. Reach out to discuss what happened; people in your situation contact us regularly. Talk it through with our team — the first consultation is free, confidential, and carries no obligation.

Empty underground parking garage with puddles on concrete floor.

The Basic Rule: Limited Duty to Trespassers

Georgia law recognizes three distinct categories of people on property—invitees, licensees, and trespassers—and each category carries a different level of legal duty from the property owner.

An invitee is someone invited onto the property for a business or social purpose; a property owner owes invitees the highest duty of care. A licensee is someone permitted to be on the property but not for the owner’s direct benefit (like a social guest); the duty to a licensee is moderate. A trespasser is someone on the property without permission or invitation; the duty to a trespasser is the lowest.

Property owners owe trespassers only the duty to refrain from willful or wanton injury. This means a property owner cannot intentionally harm a trespasser, and cannot act with such reckless disregard for safety that injury becomes virtually certain. But ordinary negligence—failing to repair a broken step, leaving debris in a path, or failing to warn of a common hazard—typically does not create liability to a trespasser. The distinction exists because property owners have greater control over who enters their land when entry is invited or permitted.

What ‘Willful or Wanton’ Injury Means

Understanding the difference between willful and wanton injury is essential to understanding when a property owner may be liable to a trespasser.

Willful injury means deliberately harming someone. Wanton injury means acting with reckless disregard for another person’s safety—knowing of a substantial risk and deliberately ignoring it. Both are significantly higher thresholds than ordinary negligence.

Consider these examples: A property owner who sets a trap designed to injure anyone who enters has acted willfully. A property owner who knows trespassers regularly cross their property, maintains a hidden pit unfenced and unmarked, and does nothing to prevent access or warn of the hazard may be acting wantonly. By contrast, a property owner who fails to repair a broken porch step or leaves a tool on the ground—without knowledge that trespassers frequent the property—typically has not acted willfully or wantonly, even if a trespasser is injured.

The property owner’s state of mind and knowledge of the trespasser’s presence matter significantly. The more a property owner knows about trespassing activity and the more dangerous the condition, the closer the conduct approaches wanton conduct.

When a Trespasser Becomes a Licensee or Invitee

A trespasser’s legal status is not fixed. It can change based on the property owner’s conduct and knowledge.

If a property owner becomes aware that someone is trespassing and does nothing to stop them—no warning, no barrier, no objection—the trespasser may be deemed a licensee (someone with implied permission). This change is significant because a property owner owes a licensee a higher duty than a trespasser: to refrain from willfully or wantonly injuring the licensee and to warn of hidden dangers the owner knows about.

Repeated trespassing that the owner knows about can elevate a trespasser to a licensee. If a property owner invites someone onto the property—even informally, even once—that person is no longer a trespasser but an invitee or licensee. This distinction can dramatically affect liability in injury cases.

Exceptions and Special Circumstances

Several important exceptions and special circumstances can increase a property owner’s duty beyond the basic “willful or wanton” standard.

Children and the Attractive Nuisance Doctrine

Georgia recognizes the “attractive nuisance” doctrine. If a property owner knows (or should know) that children are likely to trespass on the property, and the property contains a condition that poses a hidden or concealed danger to children, the property owner may owe a higher duty. This doctrine reflects the reality that children are less able to recognize and avoid danger than adults. A swimming pool, abandoned machinery, a quarry, or a construction site may qualify as an attractive nuisance if children are drawn to it and it poses a hidden risk.

Artificial Hazards

A property owner may owe a higher duty if they created or maintain an artificial hazard—something not naturally present on the land. A concealed pit, an electrified fence, or a booby trap created by the owner to injure trespassers will likely result in liability, even to a trespasser. Natural conditions (like a steep ravine or dense brush) typically do not carry the same duty.

Notice and Knowledge

If a property owner knows trespassers regularly use the property and knows of a dangerous condition on that property, liability may increase. For example, if an owner knows teenagers regularly cut through their property at night and knows a large hole exists in the ground, the owner’s failure to fence the area or warn of the hazard may cross into wanton conduct.

Commercial and Industrial Property

Trespassing on commercial or industrial property may carry different considerations than residential property, particularly if the property is inherently dangerous (a factory, a construction site, a chemical facility). Courts may find that an owner’s duty increases when the property itself is known to be hazardous.

Georgia Law and the Restatement of Torts

Georgia courts follow principles outlined in the Restatement (Second) of Torts, a widely respected legal authority that synthesizes common law principles. The Restatement addresses the duty owed to trespassers and the exceptions that may apply in specific circumstances.

Georgia courts have consistently held that property owners owe trespassers only the duty to refrain from willful or wanton conduct, absent special circumstances. Case law has refined these rules over time, particularly regarding children and artificial hazards. When you consult with an attorney about a trespasser injury case, they will review Georgia case law specific to your circumstances to determine whether an exception applies.

Not sure what your next step is?

Talk it through with our team — the first consultation is free, confidential, and carries no obligation.

How Trespasser Status Affects Your Claim

Proving you were a trespasser is not the end of a premises liability claim—it simply raises the bar for what must be proven.

You must still show the property owner acted willfully or wantonly, not merely negligently. Evidence of the owner’s knowledge—did they know you were there or that others regularly trespassed?—is critical. The nature of the hazard matters: Was it artificial or natural? Hidden or obvious? The question of whether the owner created or maintained the dangerous condition is essential.

Documenting how the injury occurred, where it happened, what hazard caused it, and what the property owner knew or should have known is vital to your case. Photographs, witness statements, records of prior incidents on the property, and evidence of the owner’s knowledge all strengthen a claim.

What This Means If You Were Injured on Someone Else’s Property

Your legal rights depend partly on whether you were invited, permitted, or trespassing when injured. Even if you were technically trespassing, you may still have a valid claim if the property owner’s conduct was willful or wanton.

The circumstances of how you came to be on the property, what hazard caused your injury, and what the owner knew all matter. Understanding your status and the applicable duty is the first step in evaluating whether you have a claim. In the premises liability cases our attorneys handle, we examine all these factors—the owner’s knowledge, the nature of the hazard, and the owner’s conduct—to determine whether liability may exist.


Empty underground parking garage with puddles on concrete floor.

Frequently Asked Questions

What is the difference between an invitee, licensee, and trespasser?

An invitee is invited for business or social purposes (highest duty owed); a licensee is permitted but not for the owner’s direct benefit (moderate duty); a trespasser is unauthorized (lowest duty—only refrain from willful or wanton injury).

Can a property owner be held liable if a trespasser is injured?

Yes, if the owner acted willfully or wantonly, or if an exception applies (such as the attractive nuisance doctrine or an artificial hazard).

Does Georgia recognize the attractive nuisance doctrine?

Yes; if a property attracts children and poses a hidden danger, the owner may owe a higher duty to child trespassers.

Can a trespasser become a licensee?

Yes; if the owner knows of repeated trespassing and does nothing to stop it, the trespasser may be deemed a licensee with implied permission, increasing the owner’s duty.

What evidence do I need to prove willful or wanton conduct?

Evidence of the owner’s knowledge of the hazard and of trespassing activity, the nature of the hazard (artificial or natural), and the owner’s conduct in creating or maintaining it.


If you were injured on someone else’s property—whether you were invited, permitted, or trespassing—the owner’s knowledge and conduct matter. Reach out to discuss what happened; people in your situation contact us regularly. Request a free consultation with our team to understand your rights.

Attorney advertising. The information on this page is for general informational purposes only and is not legal advice; reading it does not create an attorney-client relationship with Slam Dunk Attorney. Peter F. Jaraysi is the lawyer responsible for this content.
Key Point

Georgia law recognizes three categories of visitors—invitees, licensees, and trespassers—each with different levels of property owner duty. Even trespassers may have grounds for a claim if the owner's conduct was willful or wanton.

The Three Categories of Visitors

Invitees

Invited for business or social purposes. Property owners owe the highest duty of care—to maintain safe premises and warn of known hazards.

Licensees

Permitted to be on the property but not for the owner's direct benefit. Owners owe a moderate duty—to refrain from willful or wanton injury and warn of known dangers.

Trespassers

Unauthorized visitors. Owners owe the lowest duty—generally only to refrain from willful or wanton injury. Liability is rare but possible in specific circumstances.

When Trespasser Liability May Apply

Willful or Wanton Conduct

An owner may be liable if they intentionally caused harm or acted with reckless disregard for a trespasser's safety—for example, setting a trap or maintaining a dangerous condition with knowledge a trespasser would be harmed.

Artificial Conditions

Some Georgia courts recognize liability for artificial (man-made) hazards that pose an unreasonable risk to trespassers, particularly children, even without willful conduct.

Duty to Warn

If an owner knows trespassers frequent the property and is aware of a dangerous condition, the duty to warn may apply—though this is narrower than the duty owed to invitees.

Negligent Security

If inadequate security allows unauthorized access and results in injury—such as an assault by an intruder—the property owner may face liability depending on foreseeability and the specific facts.

Common Trespasser Injury Scenarios

Trespassing on Vacant or Abandoned Property

Injuries from structural collapse, exposed hazards, or toxic substances may support a claim if the owner's conduct was willful or wanton, or if the property was maintained in a dangerously defective state.

Trespassing on Fenced or Posted Land

Even marked 'No Trespassing,' an owner cannot set traps or create hidden dangers. Liability may arise if the owner knew trespassers were likely and failed to warn of serious hazards.

Child Trespassers

Georgia recognizes the 'attractive nuisance' doctrine in limited cases—if a property attracts children and poses an unreasonable risk of serious injury, liability may apply even though the child was technically trespassing.

Assault or Crime on the Property

If poor security allowed a criminal to harm a trespasser, the owner may be liable for negligent security if the risk was foreseeable and the owner failed to take reasonable precautions.

Important

Trespasser liability claims are complex and fact-specific. Georgia law balances property owner rights with fairness to the injured party. The outcome depends on the exact circumstances, the owner's knowledge and conduct, and whether the injury resulted from willful, wanton, or negligent action.

Related practice areas

Call Now — Free Consultation (404) 951-3513