Matteson v. Strong
Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court
Tort, under the Pub. Sts. c. 102, § 93, to recover double the amount of damage sustained from the bite of a dog. At the trial in the Superior Court, before Dewey, J., the jury returned a verdict for the plaintiff; and the defendant alleged exceptions, which appear in the opinion.
1Opinion of the CourtKnowlton, J.
The only defence relied on at the trial was the alleged negligence of the plaintiff. The questions were raised by two requests for rulings which were refused. The first was that there was no evidence that the plaintiff was in the exercise of due care. The second was as follows: “ If the plaintiff was attempting to prevent a fight between the two dogs, or to terminate a fight already begun, and for this purpose put his hand on either dog, and as the result, and while his hand was on one of the dogs, was bitten by the defendant’s dog, he is not entitled to recover.”
The evidence tended to show…
2Cited by3 opinions
- Goodwin v. E. B. Nelson Grocery Co.Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1921
- Raymond v. HodgsonMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1894
- Fraser v. ChapmanMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1926