Legal Opinion

Kathren v. Olenik

Court of Appeals of Oregon

Decided June 23, 1980No. 7608-11301, CA 10345PublishedCited by 20 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtRichardson, J.

Plaintiff, through her guardian ad litem, seeks recovery for personal injuries sustained when she was bitten by defendants’ dog. The trial court granted defendants’ motion for involuntary nonsuit on the ground that there was no evidence of defendants’ knowledge of their dog’s propensity to bite. Plaintiff appeals the judgment, asserting that there was sufficient evidence to submit three issues to the jury: (1) strict liability in tort for owning and possessing a vicious animal; (2) negligence for failure to confine or control the dog; and (3) negligence per se for violating the Washington…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Westberry v. BlackwellOregon Supreme Court · 1978
  2. Smith v. Portland Traction Co.Oregon Supreme Court · 1961
  3. Chance v. Ringling Bros. Barnum & Bailey, Combined Shows Inc.Oregon Supreme Court · 1970
  4. Borden v. City of SalemOregon Supreme Court · 1968
  5. Parker v. ReterOregon Supreme Court · 1963

3Cited by20 opinions

  1. Lollar v. PoeSupreme Court of Alabama · 1993
  2. King v. BreenSupreme Court of Alabama · 1990
  3. Drake v. DeanCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1993
  4. Lange v. MintonOregon Supreme Court · 1987
  5. Newport v. MoranCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1986

15 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API