Poznanski Ex Rel. Poznanski v. Horvath
Indiana Supreme Court
1Opinion of the Court
CIVIL TRANSFER
RUCKER, Justice.
The question we address in this opinion is whether the very act of an unprovoked biting by a dog that in the past displayed no vicious tendencies is sufficient by itself for a jury to infer that the animal's owner knew, or should have known, of the dog's vicious tendencies. We grant transfer to hold that it is not.
Facts and Procedural History
In this summary judgment action the following facts are not in dispute. George Horvath lives in South Bend and owned a mixed-breed sheepdog named Hey. The dog had never bitten anyone and was well behaved. No one had ever…
2Cases cited12 opinions
- Bader v. JohnsonIndiana Supreme Court · 2000
- Doe v. BarnettIndiana Court of Appeals · 1969
- Woodward Insurance, Inc. v. WhiteIndiana Supreme Court · 1982
- Tom-Wat, Inc. v. FinkIndiana Supreme Court · 2001
- Ross v. LoweIndiana Supreme Court · 1993
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by31 opinions
- Naugle v. Beech Grove City SchoolsIndiana Supreme Court · 2007
- Lachenman v. SticeIndiana Court of Appeals · 2005
- Norfolk Southern Railway Co. v. Estate of WagersIndiana Court of Appeals · 2005
- S.C. Nestel, Inc. v. Future Construction Inc.Indiana Court of Appeals · 2005
- Baker v. Heye-AmericaIndiana Court of Appeals · 2003
26 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.