Katko v. Briney case brief summary
F: Ruled in favor of P and against D, and D appealed
P: trespass D: owner
D’s house was continuously intruded and thieved, and this results D in setting a shotgun trap with intent to injure no one. One day, P entered D’s house and started to open the north bedroom door. Then, shotgun striked him.
Because house is not occupied and no people there, there is no self-defense. Therefore, unoccupied house is important fact.
ii. shotgun intended to harm intruders.
If warning sign is put, it might be consent.
R: An owner may not use a shotgun trap capable of inflicting death or serious injury against potential trespassers in order to protect his or her personal property unless the intrusion threatens death or serious bodily harm to the occupiers or users of the premises.