If you hear such a story, there are three possibilities:
The story is completely fictional.
The burglar initiated a legal action, but it was thrown out.
The owner of the property being burgled also did something illegal, such as putting man-traps on his land.
There have been successful cases of burglars suing because of mantraps set by homeowners. The burglar can’t sue for simple negligence of a homeowner due to dirty hands, but they can still sue if the homeowner deliberately laid a trap for them.
A burglar is an unanticipated trespasser, to whom the homeowner owes no duty. No duty = no breach of duty = no negligence. The trap or spring gun exception is basically the only limitation.
*the homeowner does have a duty to unanticipated trespassers. For example, if people in the neighborhood always cut across the corner of your front yard on their way to the mailboxes, you have a “duty to warn” of any non-obvious dangers (like a concealed hole in the ground).
There have been numerous cases of burglars getting compensation for injuries. The classic is the “painted over skylight” where someone was trespassing on the roof of the school and fell through a skylight, because the single pane window was painted over and appeared solid.
The logic was - it does not matter how the person got there, or why - this was an accident waiting to happen and could have happened to curious innocent youngsters as easily as to a trespassing adult. The school was negligent.
cite?
This is nonsense. The “classic case” you allude to was Bodine v. Enterprise High School, and the school district’s insurance company settled because the court had already ruled that the kid was an anticipated trespasser (the school knew that students went on the roof of the gym all the time). The rule of law has nothing to do with whether it “could have happened to curious innocent youngsters” unless it actually does. Bodine happened to be a 19 year old former student at the school.
There certainly have not been “numerous cases” of that type in the US.