Bowers v. Fitzrandolph

1 Add. 215

Opinion

President.

Whether the dog was mad or not, he having bitten Fitzrandolph, the killing of him is justifiable. The dog was a nuisance: and every man may abate a nuisance. This is not the case of a dog set to guard property, and killed by a person interfering improperly. Such killing would not be justifiable.

The jury found a verdict for the defendant.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Bowers v. Fitzrandolph, 1 Add. 215 (Pa. Super. Ct. 1794).

1 Add. 215 (Bowers v. Fitzrandolph) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.