Maine Court Heard Arguments on Innkeeper Liability Case
The Supreme Judicial Court examined whether an inn owes a duty of care for property not under its control.
Updated on Oct. 7, 2026 in Hospitality
The Maine Supreme Judicial Court heard arguments regarding an innkeeper's liability in the 2022 death of a guest who fell from the Prouts Neck Cliff Walk. The case centers on whether the inn is responsible for safety on adjacent property it does not maintain.
Why it matters
The ruling could set a legal precedent for how far an innkeeper's duty of care extends toward guests when they are off the hotel property. This decision will clarify the scope of liability for hospitality businesses regarding risks on nearby public lands.
The incident involved a 30-foot fall into a chasm from the Prouts Neck Cliff Walk. A previous summary judgment in favor of the defendants was granted by a Cumberland County Superior Court judge before the appeal.
The players
Maine Supreme Judicial Court
This is the highest court in Maine and is responsible for establishing legal precedents across the state.
Ramona Gowens
She was a guest whose fatal fall from a cliff walk in 2022 prompted the current litigation against local hospitality entities.
BPI Partners, LLC
This entity was named as a defendant in the lawsuit regarding the innkeeper's liability for a guest's fall.
Migis Hotel Group, LLC
This management group is a named defendant in the ongoing negligence case.
Prouts Neck Improvement Association
This organization maintains the cliff walk where the fatal incident occurred.
The details
Plaintiffs filed a lawsuit alleging negligence and failure to warn after Ramona Gowens died when a fence gave way at the publicly accessible walkway. The Maine Supreme Judicial Court, which regularly holds arguments at schools across the state, heard the case at Morse High School in Bath.
Timeline
Ramona Gowens died in September 2022 after falling from the cliff walk.
Plaintiffs appealed the Superior Court ruling in February 2026.
The Maine Supreme Judicial Court heard oral arguments on October 7, 2026.
Market Landscape
This case tests the boundaries of the established common law doctrine of premises liability by questioning if that duty extends to land not owned or maintained by the inn. A ruling against the hospitality companies could force hotels to reassess their liability coverage and safety warning protocols for nearby public attractions.
A decision in this case may lead to increased signage or safety warnings at public trails located near hotels and resorts. For guests, this could result in more formalized safety briefings when staying at properties near hazardous outdoor terrain.
The takeaway
Travelers should remain vigilant about local terrain hazards even when staying at well-managed properties. Understanding that property owners may not control adjacent land is a key safety practice when exploring public cliff walks or trails.
Further reading
For more on how local businesses are navigating legal challenges, visit Hospitality.
