You can file a suit against anybody for anything. If it’s obviously without merit, it’s likely to get dismissed pretty quickly. But there’s nothing stopping you from filing it.

They don't even need to go through the work of breaking in - anyone can in fact just sue anyone for any reason at any time!

Do you have an example of such a lawsuit succeeding in real life outside of the movie Liar Liar?

They are probably thinking of attractive nuisance lawsuits. For example, if you have a pool without a fence around it and a neighbor's kid trespasses and ends up falling into the pool, you could be found liable to some degree.

A lawsuit still costs money to the defendant even if it doesn't "succeed" in the end. The legal system is pretty much inaccessible to laypeople, so you need to at least hire a lawyer so they can speak the magical incantations and file the right 27b/6 form to the right clerk at the right time so you don't lose due to a paperwork technicality.

I'm not OP and didn't make any claims about "falling down stairs and filing a lawsuit". You want me to provide a generic example of someone being sued and it not succeeding? I would guess this happens daily.

I could sue you without ever walking onto your property. That doesn't mean anything.

If a new right to roam law was introduced, why couldn't it include a section on the release of any liability if one makes use of this right to roam? It's not like laws can't be adjusted, right?

Anyone can file a lawsuit for anything. Filing a lawsuit that doesn't get immediately dismissed by the judge because it has no merit, is a different question.

-----

In the Northern New England states (VT/NH/ME) that have a sort of freedom to roam codified in law (basically - unposted, undeveloped property is generally free to access for low-impact uses like hiking without requiring permission) - there is broad liability protection provided to the property owner.

For example, the law in VT for liability in that land access situation is only if the injury that occurs is "....the result of the willful or wanton misconduct of the owner." (and has further exemptions from even that if the injury is with regards to accessing equipment/machinery/personal property - which you're not entitled to access).

You pretty much need to be setting traps or creating some truly absurd unnatural hazards to be at legal risk.

I can also file a lawsuit because I don't like the color of your house. Doesn't mean it'll succeed in a court of law.

Not really true - that case was an urban myth I believe from my own searching (as I heard about it when I grew up). Would like sources if it's true.

What I did look up:

"Premises liability laws generally do not extend to trespassers, such as burglars, because they do not have a legal right to be on the property. However, property owners in California may be liable for injuries caused by a crime on their property if they should have reasonably foreseen the crime and failed to take steps to reduce the risk. This is known as negligent security and can apply to crimes such as burglary, theft, and robbery. Factors that may contribute to a negligent security claim include: Broken or missing surveillance cameras, Lack of security guards, and Broken or inadequate locks."