Brown v. Kendall
Supreme Court of Massachusetts
60 Mass. 292 (1850)
- Written by Megan Petersen, JD
Facts
George Brown (plaintiff) and George Kendall (defendant) both owned dogs. One day their dogs began to fight each other. Kendall took a long stick and began hitting the dogs to separate them. Brown watched from what he thought was a safe distance. But the dogs moved in his direction, causing Brown to move away from them, toward Kendall’s back. Kendall did not see Brown move. Kendall raised his stick again, and on his backswing, inadvertently hit Brown in the eye. Kendall severely injured Brown. Brown sued Kendall for assault and battery. The trial court judge instructed the jury that if Kendall had a duty to act and was acting in a proper manner, Kendall was not liable for Brown’s injuries. But if Kendall did not have a duty to act, then he was liable for Brown’s injuries unless he had exercised extraordinary care. After hearing these instructions, the jury returned a verdict for Brown. Kendall appealed to the Supreme Court of Massachusetts.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Shaw, C.J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 815,000 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.