Vendrella v. Astriab Family Limited Partnership, 36 A.3d 707 (Conn. Ct. App. 2012)

(two-year old plaintiff visiting a retail store located on a farm was injured when a horse he was petting bit him, removing a large portion of his cheek; the defendant owner moved for summary judgment because there was no evidence defendant had actual or constructive knowledge of any vicious tendencies of the specific horse that bit the plaintiff; district court granted summary judgment; appellate court reversed holding that negligence can be proven against the owner of a domestic animal by proof of “natural propensities” of the species to “do mischief or be vicious” rather than the tendencies of a specific animal; if the species possesses the natural propensities to cause harm, then the owner must take precautions to prevent a foreseeable injury; a question of fact was generated in this case as to whether the defendant had notice that the horse belonged to a class of domestic animals possessing a natural propensity to bite). This case was affirmed on appeal.

 

CALT does not provide legal advice. Any information provided on this website is not intended to be a substitute for legal services from a competent professional. CALT's work is supported by fee-based seminars and generous private gifts. Any opinions, findings, conclusions or recommendations expressed in the material contained on this website do not necessarily reflect the views of Iowa State University.

RSS​ Facebook Twitter