- Mahlandt v. Wild Canid Survival & Research Center (8th Cir 1978) (p.207)
- alleged attack of a wolf on a child; no one saw the incident; pretty strong evidence that the wolf didn’t assault the boy, and that the boy’s injuries happened when the boy crawled under the fence; jury finds for Δ center
- on appeal, π argues that three statements should have been admitted
- two were made by Mr. Poos, in whose yard the wolf was – employee of center, was keeping the wolf in his yard, to show her off at schools
- after he heard about incident, he sent note to president of the center: “Call me at home, Sophie bit a child that came into our backyard”
- later meets president at the center, tells him “Sophie bit a child today”
- third statement: minutes of board of center – says “there was a great deal of discussion about the legal consequences of Sophie biting a child”
- holding: first two statements should have been admitted (abuse of discretion not to)
- lack of personal knowledge by the party-opponent isn’t valid basis for exclusion of statement – jury may reject the conclusion, but opponent has right to introduce it to jury
- third statement isn’t admissible against Poos (party-Δ), since principal’s statements aren’t admissible against the agent (no reverse agency principle)
- and it’s substantively the same as against Δ center, so it wasn’t necessary – not abuse of discretion for trial judge to exclude it.
The best place for complete law school case briefs and law-related news. Want to advertise or post sponsored content? contact us at mrmetropolitan@gmail.com
Thursday, September 6, 2012
Mahlandt v. Wild Canid Survival & Research Center case brief
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Exploring Career Paths: What Can You Do with a Juris Doctor Degree?
Earning a Juris Doctor (JD) degree is a significant accomplishment, opening a wide array of career paths beyond the traditional legal practi...

-
Class 1: Elements of Fundamental Value: Present Value, Future Value, Net Present Value: Elements of Fundamental Value (38) One year : ...
-
I can help you land in the top 10% of your law school class. Imagine, how your life would be different if you were in the top 10% o...
-
Corthell v. Summit Thread Company (1933) · Facts: Corthell is a salesman for Summit. He invents contraption that is bought b...
No comments:
Post a Comment