Clark v. Brings case brief
169 N.W.2d 407 (Minn. 1969)
SYNOPSIS:
In an action by appellant babysitter against respondent homeowners to recover for personal injuries which resulted from an attack by the homeowners' pet cat, the Hennepin County District Court directed a verdict in favor of the homeowners and denied the babysitter's motion for a new trial. The babysitter filed an appeal.
OVERVIEW: The babysitter sustained personal injuries as a result of an attack by the homeowners' cat. The attack occurred while the babysitter was caring for the homeowners' children. The babysitter initiated an action against the homeowners and sought to recover for her personal injuries. At the close of the babysitter's evidence, the trial court directed a verdict in favor of the homeowners. In addition, the trial court denied the babysitter's motion for a new trial.
HOLDING:
On review, the court affirmed the judgment of the trial court. In reaching its decision, the court rejected the babysitter's argument that Minn. Stat. § 347.22, the statute which imposed strict liability on owners of dogs in certain circumstances, should be judicially extended to hold owners of cats strictly liability for the acts of their cats.
ANALYSIS:
Moreover, the court rejected the babysitter's argument that the evidence in the case was sufficient to hold the homeowners liable under the common law as it stood at the time of the case. Lastly, the court rejected the babysitter's argument that the homeowners should be held liable for failing to provide the babysitter with a safe place to work.
OUTCOME: The court affirmed the judgment of the trial court.
---
Interested in learning how to get the top grades in your law school classes? Want to learn how to study smarter than your competition? Interested in transferring to a high ranked school?
-->
169 N.W.2d 407 (Minn. 1969)
SYNOPSIS:
In an action by appellant babysitter against respondent homeowners to recover for personal injuries which resulted from an attack by the homeowners' pet cat, the Hennepin County District Court directed a verdict in favor of the homeowners and denied the babysitter's motion for a new trial. The babysitter filed an appeal.
OVERVIEW: The babysitter sustained personal injuries as a result of an attack by the homeowners' cat. The attack occurred while the babysitter was caring for the homeowners' children. The babysitter initiated an action against the homeowners and sought to recover for her personal injuries. At the close of the babysitter's evidence, the trial court directed a verdict in favor of the homeowners. In addition, the trial court denied the babysitter's motion for a new trial.
HOLDING:
On review, the court affirmed the judgment of the trial court. In reaching its decision, the court rejected the babysitter's argument that Minn. Stat. § 347.22, the statute which imposed strict liability on owners of dogs in certain circumstances, should be judicially extended to hold owners of cats strictly liability for the acts of their cats.
ANALYSIS:
Moreover, the court rejected the babysitter's argument that the evidence in the case was sufficient to hold the homeowners liable under the common law as it stood at the time of the case. Lastly, the court rejected the babysitter's argument that the homeowners should be held liable for failing to provide the babysitter with a safe place to work.
OUTCOME: The court affirmed the judgment of the trial court.
---
Interested in learning how to get the top grades in your law school classes? Want to learn how to study smarter than your competition? Interested in transferring to a high ranked school?
-->
No comments:
Post a Comment