Rossi v. Delduca

181 N.E.2d 591 (1962)

Purchase the Printed Copy at bsmsphd.com

Nature of the Case

To access this section all you need to do is click here and register.

Facts

P, who was eight-years-old, lived with her parents and to reach home from the south it is necessary to pass three houses occupied by D and members of his family. D had erected a pen to house two great Dane dogs. Another family member was the owner of a purplish-gray German Weimaraner dog. P and a friend were coming home from school when the Weimaraner started to come towards them. They got frightened and ran down a street but left it because it was a dead end. The dog continued to follow them. They passed a shed near where D kept his two great Danes. At which point, P saw the dog on its hind legs, and it jumped her. All she remembers is two black dogs were on her and were biting her neck. She called for help, and her father rescued her and took her to the hospital. P sued D for the injuries. D testified the dogs were his and were trained to stay in the field at the rear of the home where his construction equipment was kept. P sued under statutory authority where the owner or keeper of a dog is liable . . . for injury resulting from an act of the dog without proof . . . that its owner or keeper was negligent or otherwise at fault, or knew, or had reason to know, that the dog had any extraordinary, dangerous propensity, and even without proof that the dog had any such propensity. The strict liability imposed by the statute is of no avail to a plaintiff if at the time of his injury he 'was committing a trespass or other tort, or was teasing, tormenting or abusing the dog.' D contends that the plaintiff is barred from recovery because on her own testimony because she was a trespasser. D moved for a directed verdict, and it was denied. D appealed.