Pressey v. Wirth
Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court
Tort under Rev Sts. c. 58, § 13, to recover double the amount oí damages sustained from the bite of a dog. At the trial in tne superior court, before Ames, J., a verdict was returned for the plaintiff, and the defendant alleged exceptions. The facts sufficiently appear in the opinion.
1Opinion of the CourtDewey, J.
1. The court properly instructed the jury as to the evidence necessary to charge the defendant in an action to recover double damages for an injury sustained from the bite of the dog of the defendant. The statute has enlarged the liability at common law of owners or keepers of dogs, and it is no longer necessary to allege or prove that the owner knew of the dangerous character and habits of his dog, or that the dog was in fa.ct accustomed to bite. Rev. Sts. c. 58, § 13.
2. It furnishes no ground of exception that the jury were directed, after having ascertained the actual damages, to render…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Warren v. DoolittleCourt for the Trial of Impeachments and Correction of Errors · 1825