The North Dakota Supreme Court last week made significant rulings surrounding the state’s natural accumulation rule. This rule precludes liability for injuries resultant from the natural accumulation of snow and ice. The court was presented with two questions certified from the U.S. District Court for the District of North Dakota. The first question asked whether the accumulation rule applies to an oil well site located in a rural region. The second question sought to understand if the rule applies when snow or ice conceals a condition substantially more dangerous than one typically associated with ice and snow. Complete details of the expansion are available here.
In a statement, Justice Jerod E. Tufte highlighted the importance of the rule in protecting remote areas. He posited that it’s unreasonable to expect an owner or operator to consistently monitor and speedily clear any naturally accumulating snow or ice in remote territories such as an oil well site in rural North Dakota. The reasonableness of monitoring such remote areas, and the subsequent lack of notice stemming from it, he said, underscores the rationale behind the rule and its applicability in these situations. More details can be gleaned from the original news report.