| N.Y. Sup. Ct. | Aug 15, 1816
The judgment ds clearly .wrong. If damage be done by any domestic animal, kept for use or convenience, the owner is not liable to an action on the ground of riegligence,. without proof that he knew that the animal was'accustomed to do mischief. (1 Ld. Raym. 109, 2 Ld. Raym. 1583. Buxendin v. Sharp, 2 Salk. 662.)
Judgment reversed,
1 Chitty on Plead. 69.