Legal Opinion

Clark v. Connor

Court of Appeals of Minnesota

Decided January 21, 2014No. A13-1110Published

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION

HOOTEN, Judge.

Appellant co-tortfeasor challenges the district court’s judgment against her after a jury found the dog-owner tortfeasors liable, arguing that the dog-attack statute precludes apportioning of liability based on comparative fault between tortfeasors. Because we conclude that the legislature did not intend the dog-attack statute to preclude apportioning of liability based on comparative fault between tortfeasors, we affirm.

FACTS

A pit bull barked at and chased respondent Faron Clark into the street, where he collided with appellant Vydell Jones’s passing van. Respondent…

2Cases cited7 opinions

  1. Seim Ex Rel. Seim v. GaravaliaSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1981
  2. Swenson v. NickaboineSupreme Court of Minnesota · 2011
  3. Davies v. West Publishing Co.Court of Appeals of Minnesota · 2001
  4. Lavalle Ex Rel. Lavalle v. KauppSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1953
  5. Oelschlager v. MagnusonCourt of Appeals of Minnesota · 1995

2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API