Just finished reading the 2008 Connecticut Appellate Review by Wesley W. Horton and Kenneth J. Bartschi and they touched upon the very important case of Allen v. Cox. The authors pose the question: Does a cat get one free bite? Their answer, “No, if the cat has a bad reputationl yes, if it has a good reputation.”
Imagine introducing evidence at trial concerning the character of a cat. They’re all evil.
So often it’s the dogs that get all of the bad press. Here at aconnecticutlawblog, make no bones about it – I’m a dog person.
In the interest of equal time, I’ve decided to write about cat bite law.
Today, the Connecticut Supreme Court released an opinion holding that when a cat has a propensity to attack other cats, knowledge of that propensity may render the owner liable for injuries to people that are reasonably foreseeable as a result of such behavior. Allen v. Cox
Ms. Allen was injured when she tried to protect her cat from a cat that had previously attacked other cats. When Ms. Allen heard two cats fighting she opened her door and her cat ran towards her and she picked it up and put her cat inside. The defendant’s cat jumped on Ms. Allen and bit her in her left arm.
In viewing the facts in a light most favorable to the plaintiff, the Connecticut Supreme Court found that it was reasonably foreseeable that a person would try to protect their cat from being attacked by another cat. There was a genuine issue of material fact as to whether the defendants knew or should have known that their cat’s vicious propensities could lead it to injure a person.
Pictured above is Socks the cat. Socks is too lazy to attack anything let alone anyone which is good news for his owners.
Did I read that correctly? All cats "are evil"? Even as a "cat person," I still respect "dog people." So where is the mutual love of all animals? Its not like the Yankees v. Red Sox, where clearly there is a defining line between good and evil.
Reply
Cats kill pests. That's about the best thing about them.
Reply
Thanks, excellent article.
Reply