Brown v. Kendall - Rule: For the defendant to properly...

Info iconThis preview shows page 1. Sign up to view the full content.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
Brown v. Kendall 60 Mass. 292 Fact: Operative Facts: 2 men’s dogs were fighting. To break them up, one of the man took out a 4 foot stick and wiped the dog. The dogs advanced on him, so he started to walk backwards. The other man was behind him, so the stick when it was being pulled back behind his shoulder, hit the other man in the eye, causing a lot of damages Issue: Whether there was “intent” for assault and battery
Background image of page 1
This is the end of the preview. Sign up to access the rest of the document.

Unformatted text preview: Rule: For the defendant to properly defend, it must have been his duty to break up the dogs, or he must have been using ordinary care (not being reckless). Rational: The courts were fighting over the rule. Whether they needed both ordinary care and a duty, or just ordinary care. Holding: Sent back to trial court to find whether there was ordinary care and a duty. Synthesis: Dissent/Concurrences:...
View Full Document

Ask a homework question - tutors are online