History
  • No items yet
midpage
Reddett v. Mosley
222 So. 2d 369
| Ala. Ct. App. | 1969
|
Check Treatment
222 So.2d 369 (1969)

Irby D. REDDETT
v.
Jimmy R. MOSLEY.

1 Div. 366.

Court of Appeals of Alabama.

April 15, 1969.

*370 Pillans, Reams, Tappan, Wood & Roberts, Mobile, for appellant.

Moore, Moore, Downing & Layden, Mobile, for appellee.

CATES, Judge.

Negligence for dog bite: verdict for plaintiff, $683.00. Defendant appealed.

Animals are divided (in tort law): ferae naturae and mansuetae naturae. Dogs fall into the latter class.

Hence, the law puts the burden of proving the owner's scienter on the person attacked by the dog. Otherwise, the owner of a dog would be under absolute liability as might be the keeper of a tiger or a cobra.

This rule is one of judicial notice and requires proof of the defendant's knowledge (actual or imputed) of the domestic animal's dangerous propensity as a sine qua non in the elements of the claimed negligence. Mason v. Keeling (1699), 12 Mod. 332, also reported in 1 Ld.Raym. 606.

No proof was made in the defendant's knowing of the dog manifesting a tendency to bite mankind. Owen v. Hampson, 258 Ala. 228, 62 So.2d 245(6).

The case ought not to have gone to the jury without such proof. Hence, the judgment below is due to be reversed and the cause there remanded for trial de novo.

Reversed and remanded.

Case Details

Case Name: Reddett v. Mosley
Court Name: Alabama Court of Appeals
Date Published: Apr 15, 1969
Citation: 222 So. 2d 369
Docket Number: 1 Div. 366
Court Abbreviation: Ala. Ct. App.
AI-generated responses must be verified and are not legal advice.
Your Notebook is empty. To add cases, bookmark them from your search, or select Add Cases to extract citations from a PDF or a block of text.