Denison v. Lincoln
Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court
Tort, under the Gen. Sts. a. 88, § 59, to recover double the amount of the damage alleged to have been caused by the defendant’s dog.
Read the full summary
Tort, under the Gen. Sts. a. 88, § 59, to recover double the amount of the damage alleged to have been caused by the defendant’s dog. Trial in the Superior Court, before Allen, J., who allowed a bill of exceptions, in substance as follows: The plaintiff offered evidence tending to show that she was riding with her husband in a carriage drawn by her husband’s horse, in October 1878, upon a highway; that the defendant and his dog were in a lot occupied by the defendant; and that the dog bounded furiously down the lot, leaped down the bank wall of the lot by the highway into the road, in front…
1Opinion of the Court
By the Court.
The jury were instructed that, in order to recover, the plaintiff must prove that the act of the' dog was the sole and proximate cause of the shying of the horse. This instruction was sufficiently favorable to the defendant, and precluded the return of a verdict for the plaintiff if any negligence on her part, or any fault of the horse, contributed to the accident in which she was hurt. The further instruction, that, “ if the horse had a habit of shying amounting to a vice, and on this occasion shied by reason of such vicious habit, or if such vicious habit contributed to the…
2Cited by8 opinions
- Taylor v. Carew Manufacturing Co.Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1887
- Hathaway v. TinkhamMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1888
- Canavan v. GeorgeMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1935
- Ryan v. MarrenMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1914
- Curran v. BurkhardtMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1941
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.