Legal Opinion

Jarrett v. Sheck

Massachusetts District Court, Appellate Division

Decided June 30, 1998Published

1Opinion of the CourtAguiar, J.

This appeal raises the issue of whether the plaintiff, on the facts found, was a trespasser barred from recovery under the “dog bite” statute.

We find there was no error.

Jeffrey Jarrett testified that he was a contractor; that he and the defendant were friends; that he had done work for the defendant; that he was presently doing work for the defendant (remodeling the kitchen and repainting the interior of her home); that he had brought the plaintiff, his 14 year old son, to the defendant’s home two months before the incident and that the plaintiff had petted defendant’s dogs at that time…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Monterosso v. GaudetteMassachusetts Appeals Court · 1979
  2. Raboin v. O'ConnorMassachusetts District Court, Appellate Division · 1970

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

Powered by the Exa API