legal news


Register | Forgot Password

PRIEBE v. NELSON PART-II

PRIEBE v. NELSON PART-II
08:30:2006

PRIEBE v. NELSON



Filed 8/28/06





IN THE SUPREME COURT OF CALIFORNIA





MARTA PRIEBE, )


)


Plaintiff and Appellant, )


) S126412


v. )


) Ct.App. 1/4 A101630


RUSSELL NELSON, )


) Humboldt County


Defendant and Appellant. ) Super. Ct. No. DR010121


_______________________________________ )


Continue from Part I ……….



We have shown that subdivision (a) of section 3342 has been held to impose a duty of care on every dog owner to prevent his or her dog from biting persons in a public place or lawfully in a private place so as â€





Description Veterinarian's rule under which dog owners who contract with veterinarians to treat their dogs are exempt from liability, should their dog bite a veterinarian during treatment, also bars kennel worker's strict liability claim against a dog owner under Civil Code Sec. 3342 for injuries sustained from a dog bite or attack while worker was caring for owner's dog boarded at kennel. Kennel worker's allegations that dog owner failed to disclose that dog was predisposed to bite and attack people could be relevant on retrial to common law strict liability and negligence causes of action. This action may be maintained if owner of a domestic animal that bites or injures another person knew or had reason to know of animal's vicious propensities.
Rating
0/5 based on 0 votes.

    Home | About Us | Privacy | Subscribe
    © 2024 Fearnotlaw.com The california lawyer directory

  Copyright © 2024 Result Oriented Marketing, Inc.

attorney
scale