In article ,
It is *still* _PRIVATE_PROPERTY_, and the property owner _does_ have the legal right to determine who can, and *cannot*, be present on their property.
The property can extend an invitation (permission) to the 'general public', and then revoke -- by 'actual notice' to the party involved -- that permission for specific individuals.
Where an invitation to the general public exists, *before* you can be charged with trespass, they must first expressly notify you that your presence is 'no longer welcome' (i.e., they ask you to leave the premises, "now"), and you fail to comply with that request in a timely manner.
If you allow somebody into your apartment -- say, to use the phone -- do you think you should have no recourse, if they sit down on the sofa and refuse to leave when you ask?
[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: There is a considerable difference between purely private, residential property and privately owned property used for commercial purposes, as any reasonably intelligent person would explain to you. At my house, for example, I have to positively invite someone to come in to use the phone. Walmart does not 'invite' someone in to do shopping or use the phone. The store just sits there with an open door; people walk in and out at their leisure. No one specifically 'invites' or 'allows' them to come in to do shopping. Now if Walmart was to specifically lock their front door, and have someone sit there to question all comers, and specifi- cally allow them to come in to do shopping or use the phone or whatever that would be different. When is the last time you ever heard someone walk into Walmart, seek out the manager or some responsible employee and ask permission, "is it okay if I come in to go shopping?" PAT]