Hart v. Geysel

(dissenting) — I am unable to concur in the prevailing opinion because it is contrary to the better reasoning as stated in what is called the majority rule, is contrary to public policy, and sets a bad precedent.

The first error contained in the prevailing opinion is that there are no facts in the complaint showing that the mutual combat was engaged in in anger, that there was malicious intent to seriously injure, or that there was excessive force. If excessive force be necessary as an element of recovery in a case where a mutual combat was voluntarily engaged in, the complaint alleges it in…