Brousseau v. Rosenthal
New York City Civil Court
110 Misc. 2d 1054, 443 N.Y.S.2d 285 (1980)
- Written by Haley Gintis, JD
Facts
In August 1970, Junelle Brousseau (plaintiff) received a mixed-breed German Shepherd as a gift following the death of her husband. In July 1979, Brousseau left the dog in Benjamin Rosenthal’s (defendant) custody for boarding. When Brousseau arrived at the kennel less than two weeks later, Rosenthal informed her that the dog had died. Rosenthal was unable to offer an explanation as to how the dog had died. Brousseau pursued an autopsy of the dog, which was inconclusive on the cause of death. Brousseau then filed a negligence action against Rosenthal. At the trial, Brousseau testified about the deep connection she felt with her dog and the psychological trauma she suffered after the dog’s death. Evidence was also introduced that after the dog’s death, Brousseau’s home was robbed. Brousseau alleged that had the dog been alive, the dog’s barking would have scared away the intruders. The court determined that Brousseau and Rosenthal had entered into a bailor-bailee relationship, which shifted the burden onto Rosenthal, as the bailee, to rebut the presumption that he had acted negligently. The court found that Rosenthal had not rebutted the presumption of negligence. The court then considered the award of damages.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Taylor, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 814,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,300 briefs, keyed to 988 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.