Maxwell v. Palmerton
New York Supreme Court
Error from the Saratoga common pleas. Maxwell sued Palmerton in a justice’s court in an action of trespass for killing his dog. The defendant proved by several witnesses that the dog was ferocious, had repeatedly made attacks upon sundry persons, and was looked upon as dangerous.
Read the full summary
Error from the Saratoga common pleas. Maxwell sued Palmerton in a justice’s court in an action of trespass for killing his dog. The defendant proved by several witnesses that the dog was ferocious, had repeatedly made attacks upon sundry persons, and was looked upon as dangerous. Several of the witnesses who gave instances of the bad conduct of the dog, also expressed their opinions that they considered him a dangerous dog ; which expressions of opinion were objected to by the plaintiff as not proper evidence, but the objection was overruled. It was insisted also by the plaintiff that no…
1Opinion of the Court
By the Court,
Nelson, O. J.
I doubt if it be necessary in this and the like cases to prove a scienter upon the owner. If the dog be in fact ferocious, at large, and a terror to the neighborhood, the public should be justified in dispatching him at once. It seems to be settled that such proof is not necessary where a dog is in the habit of chasing conies in a warren, or deer in a park, and that he may be killed for the protection of those animals. How much more proper is it, that this should be the rule, and most singular would it be were it otherwise, when the persons and lives of rational…
2Cited by11 opinions
- Sentell v. New Orleans & Carrollton R. Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1897
- Woolf v. ChalkerSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1862
- Aldrich v. WrightSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1873
- Sentell v. New Orleans & Carrollton RailroadSupreme Court of the United States · 1897
- Dunlap v. SnyderNew York Supreme Court · 1854
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.