Severson v. Ring

615 N.E.2d 1 (1993)

From our private database of 46,500+ case briefs, written and edited by humans—never with AI.

Severson v. Ring

Illinois Appellate Court
615 N.E.2d 1 (1993)

RW

Facts

Donna Ring (defendant) was caring for two-year-old Bryan Villareal (plaintiff) and five other children when David Herborn asked and received Ring’s permission to chain Herborn’s dog Samson to a tree in Ring’s yard while Herborn performed a brief errand. Herborn told Ring that Samson could become nervous and threatening when he was chained up. Accordingly, Ring obeyed Herborn’s instructions not to approach or care for Samson in any way while Herborn was gone. Ring did not know that Samson had bitten a toddler just three weeks earlier. Bryan and some of the other children were playing when, apparently, Bryan came too close to Samson. The dog bit Bryan’s face, inflicting serious injury. Bryan’s mother, Zarita Severson (plaintiff), sued Ring on Bryan’s behalf. One count charged Ring with liability for damages as Samson’s “owner” under the Illinois Animal Control Act (ACA). A second count sought to recover damages for Ring’s alleged common-law negligence. The trial court summarily dismissed both counts. Severson and Bryan appealed to the Illinois Appellate Court.

Rule of Law

Issue

Holding and Reasoning (McCuskey, J.)

What to do next…

  1. Unlock this case brief with a free (no-commitment) trial membership of Quimbee.

    You’ll be in good company: Quimbee is one of the most widely used and trusted sites for law students, serving more than 832,000 law students since 2011. Some law schools even subscribe directly to Quimbee for all their law students.

  2. Learn more about Quimbee’s unique (and proven) approach to achieving great grades at law school.

    Quimbee is a company hell-bent on one thing: helping you get an “A” in every course you take in law school, so you can graduate at the top of your class and get a high-paying law job. We’re not just a study aid for law students; we’re the study aid for law students.

Here's why 832,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:

  • Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,500 briefs, keyed to 994 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.

Access this case brief for FREE

With a 7-day free trial membership
Here's why 832,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
  • Reliable - written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students
  • The right length and amount of information - includes the facts, issue, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents
  • Access in your class - works on your mobile and tablet
  • 46,500 briefs - keyed to 994 casebooks
  • Uniform format for every case brief
  • Written in plain English - not in legalese and not just repeating the court's language
  • Massive library of related video lessons - and practice questions
  • Top-notch customer support

Access this case brief for FREE

With a 7-day free trial membership