Kessler v. Katz

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Kessler v. Katz

212 A.D. 838

CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York

DecidedJanuary 15, 1925

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 212 A.D. 838 (Kessler v. Katz) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Kessler v. Katz, 212 A.D. 838 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1925).

Pincite

Opinion

The trial court erred in declining to charge as requested at folio 142, and the judgment and order are reversed upon the law and the facts, and a new trial granted, with costs to abide the event. The very purpose for which the animal was kept, viz., for protection, and as a watch dog, [839]*839charges the defendant with knowledge of his character, even though it does not appear that he had bitten others. (Brice v. Bauer, 108 N. Y. 428, 432.) Kelly, P. J., Rich, Manning, Young and Kapper, JJ., concur.

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

The trial court erred in declining to charge as requested at folio 142, and the judgment and order are reversed upon the law and the facts, and a new trial granted, with costs to abide the event. The very purpose for which the animal was kept, viz., for protection, and as a watch dog, [839]*839charges the defendant with knowledge of his character, even though it does not appear that he had bitten others. (Brice v. Bauer, 108 N. Y. 428, 432.) Kelly, P. J., Rich, Manning, Young and Kapper, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

212 A.D. 838, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/kessler-v-katz-nyappdiv-1925.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack