Martin Hayes v. City of Plummer, 159 Idaho 168

Martin Hayes was injured at Plummer School Park (owned by City of Plummer) when he stumbled on uneven ground while attending a Pop Warner game; he paid no admission or fee to enter the park.
The Park was conveyed to the City in 1976 for $10 after a Joint Service Agreement (JSA) with the School District to develop and operate outdoor recreational facilities.
Under the JSA, the School District pays for maintenance, utilities, improvements, insurance for improvements, and controls scheduling for organized events; the Park remains open to the public free of charge.
Hayes sued the City for premises liability; the district court granted summary judgment for the City, holding Idaho’s Recreational Use Statute limited the City’s liability because the City neither charged nor received compensation for park use.
On appeal, the sole dispositive issue was whether the School District’s provision of services and benefits to the City constituted “compensation” or a “charge” that would defeat the statute’s immunity.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether School District’s payments/services constitute "compensation" or a "charge" under Idaho’s Recreational Use Statute	Hayes: School District’s maintenance, utilities, insurance, improvements, and scheduling are economic benefits that amount to compensation, so immunity should not apply	City: No fee or admission charged to public; services provided by School District do not equal compensation or a charge for use of the land	Held: Not compensation/charge. Statute protects landowner because public access was free; exception applies only where landowner receives payment for public’s use/admission
Whether Hayes’s presence fell within School District’s permission such that immunity is lost	Hayes: Issue of fact whether his attendance was under School District’s permission and use (argued in briefing)	City: Third-party scheduling does not negate City’s immunity; no authority shows third-party event organizers strip immunity	Held: Court declined to consider unsupported argument; no authority showed third-party scheduling defeats immunity; immunity stands

Allen v. State ex rel. Dep’t of Parks & Recreation, 136 Idaho 487, 36 P.3d 1275 (Idaho 2001) (compensation exception applied where public paid vehicle entry fee)
Albertson v. Fremont Cnty., Idaho, 834 F. Supp. 2d 1117 (D. Idaho 2011) (registration fees allocated to upkeep did not defeat recreational-use immunity when park access remained free)
Ducey v. United States, 713 F.2d 504 (9th Cir. 1983) (concessioner fees treated as consideration supporting exception where fees effectively charged for permission to recreate)
Twohig v. United States, 711 F. Supp. 560 (D. Mont. 1989) (landowner received economic benefit from paid ski passes; immunity not available)
Corey v. State, 108 Idaho 921, 703 P.2d 685 (Idaho 1985) (affirming lower court decision referenced in later analysis)