The status of an invitee
According to the standard established by the Supreme Court of Florida in Steinberg v Irwing Operating Co I would an implied invitee of the restaurant. An invitee is a person who enters premises responding to an express or implied invitation either from the owner or from an occupier (Peerenboom v. HSP Foods, Inc). In Steinberg v Irwing Operating Co the plaintiff entered a hotel to pass a message to one of the hotel’s guests. The guest was not in a hotel at the moment and the plaintiff decided to explore lounge and rooms next to the hotel’s lobby. The plaintiff was injured when he entered a Movie Room. The court pointed that the guest was undoubtedly an invitee and his callers were also invitees, unless they cross the boundaries of an implied invitation and go beyond such public premises as lobby, hallways, elevators and beyond such a private premise as the guest’s room.
Now, applying the rule established in Steinberg v Irwing Operating Co, it is reasonable to conclude that when I entered the restaurant to deliver the fax to the boss, I was an implied invitee. It is reasonable for a restaurant to expect that their customers will have callers and visitors. Such callers and visitors, according to Steinberg v Irwing Operating Co, must be covered by the doctrine of an implied invitation, unless they do not go beyond public premises. When I entered the restaurant, I did not go beyond public premises, but stayed at the place where people took their meal, so all the time I was within the boundary of a public premise. In case I snuck some food from the boss’s plate without her being aware, my status would not change.
The status of an invitee can be changed only if he or she unforeseeably departs from the premises to which an express or implied invitation is stretched to the premises not covered by the invitation. The fact that I took some food from the boss’s plate does not change my location. I still was in the premise which is covered by an implied invitation. Hence, there are no reasons for change of my status.
References:
Peerenboom v. HSP Foods, Inc., 910 S.W.2d 156 (Tex. App. 1995)
Steinberg v. Irwin Operating Co., 90 So. 2d 460, 58 A.L.R.2d 1198 (Fla. …
