Marshall v. Blackshire
Supreme Court of Iowa
Appeal from Webster Oirouit Oourt. Action to recover the value of a dog, maliciously and willfully shot and killed by the defendant. The answer denied the allegations, and averred “ the dog was killed on defendant’s premises while in the act of chasing, worrying, injuring and killing his domestic animals, consisting of horses, cattle, hogs, hens and chickens.” There was a jury trial, verdict and judgment for the plaintiff, and defendant appeals.
1Opinion of the Court
Seevers, Oh. J.
1 peactioetorfestolury: answers. I. At the proper time defendant ashed the court to submit the following interrogatory to the jury, to be answered by them as a part of their verdict: “Had the dog in question, a short time before being killed, been chasing or worrying defendant’s chickens on defendant’s premises, and, at or about the time of being killed, had he again returned to defendant’s premises for the purpose of worrying and chasing chickens,” etc.
The testimony is before us, and we are unable to find any error in the refusal of the court to submit this interrogatory to…
2Cited by17 opinions
- O'Leary v. WangensteenSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1928
- State ex. rel. Curtis v. City of TopekaSupreme Court of Kansas · 1886
- O'Leary Bros. v. German-American InsuranceSupreme Court of Iowa · 1896
- Failing v. PeopleSupreme Court of Colorado · 1940
- State v. ChurchillIdaho Supreme Court · 1909
12 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.