Garratt v. Dailey case brief summary
279 P.2d 1091 (1955)
CASE FACTS
On appeal, the supreme court remanded for a determination of whether defendant knew that plaintiff would attempt to sit in the chair.
CONCLUSION
Supreme court remanded for clarification, with instructions to make definite findings on the issue of whether defendant knew with substantial certainty that plaintiff would attempt to sit down where the chair which he moved had been, and to change the judgment if the court found that he had such knowledge.
Suggested Study Aids For Tort Law
279 P.2d 1091 (1955)
CASE SYNOPSIS
Plaintiff appealed from a judgment of
the Pierce County Superior Court (Washington) entered upon findings
in favor of defendant in an action for assault and battery.CASE FACTS
- Defendant, a child under the age of six, was visiting plaintiff's adult sister at plaintiff's home.
- Plaintiff alleged that she came out into the backyard to talk with sister and that, as she started to sit down in a wood and canvas lawn chair, defendant deliberately pulled it out from under her.
- The trial court found that defendant was attempting to move the chair toward plaintiff to aid her in sitting down in the chair and that, due to defendant's small size and lack of dexterity, he was unable to get the lawn chair under plaintiff in time to prevent her from falling to the ground.
- Plaintiff fell to the ground and sustained injuries and damages.
- The trial court entered judgment for defendant.
On appeal, the supreme court remanded for a determination of whether defendant knew that plaintiff would attempt to sit in the chair.
CONCLUSION
Supreme court remanded for clarification, with instructions to make definite findings on the issue of whether defendant knew with substantial certainty that plaintiff would attempt to sit down where the chair which he moved had been, and to change the judgment if the court found that he had such knowledge.
Suggested Study Aids For Tort Law
No comments:
Post a Comment