Thursday, March 27, 2014

Connecticut does not find horses are inherently dangerous

While Maryland is still discussing whether dogs are inherently dangerous (see here), the Connecticut supreme court has issued a decision on the possible liability for injuries caused by horses.  The court affirmed a lower court decision that had ruled that horses are, by nature, vicious animals.  However, while it affirmed the lower court's decision, the court did not find that horses are, by nature, vicious animals.

The question for the court was whether a defendant has a duty to take reasonable steps to prevent animals from causing foreseeable injuries.  Thus, the case involved a negligence claim, not a strict liability issue.  In ruling that a defendant does have a duty to prevent foreseeable injuries, the court simply applied the traditional rule that applies in all negligence cases.  The case is called Vendrella v. Astriab Family Limited Partnership.  You can read the opinion here.  Go here for more on the story.

No comments: