In Clementoni v Consolidated Rail Corp., 2007 NY Slip Op 03792, the plaintiff was injured when he attempted to drive across unmarked railroad tracks on a private gravel road owned by one set of defendants and his automobile was struck by a train. He'd driven across the railroad tracks on at least three times prior occasions and believed that the tracks were being usind by trains at the time that he drove across the tracks.
He brought suit against the landowners who owned the gravel for failure to warn of a dangerous condition and also alleged that the other defendants, landowners who owned the land bordering the tracks, was liable for failing to trim vegetation that impeded his view of the tracks.
As for the owners of the gravel road, the Court held that:
"[A]s a general matter, [a landowner] owes no duty to warn or to protect others from a defective or dangerous condition on neighboring premises, unless the [landowner] ha[s] created or contributed to it"...(The owners) had "no reason to expect that [plaintiff] would not observe the hazard or any conceivable risk associated with it"...(Internal citations omitted).
The Court then determined that the owners of the adjacent land were not liable either since "a landowner is generally not liable for the existence of uncut vegetation obstructing the view of motorists at an intersection."
Unfortunately, I've got nothing insightful or witty to add to this holding. I'm at a loss. Anyone else care to expound a bit?