Whitten v. Luck
Illinois Appellate Court
6 N.E.3d 866 (2014)
- Written by Rich Walter, JD
Facts
Donna Luck (defendant) owned a 75-acre farm. Luck often visited the farm, but she did not live there. Instead, Luck rented the farmhouse to Daniel Lesko (defendant). The lease prohibited Lesko from keeping his large dog inside the farmhouse, but Luck permitted Lesko to keep the dog in an old barn otherwise used only for storage. Luck had no other contact with the dog, which was exclusively under Lesko’s care, custody, and control. The dog escaped from the barn and ran onto an adjacent road. The dog crossed paths with Douglas Whitten (plaintiff), causing Whitten to fall off his motorcycle and sustain injuries. Whitten sued for damages, alleging that the Illinois Animal Control Act (ACA) imposed liability on Lesko as the dog’s legal owner and on Luck as a statutory “owner” who had harbored the dog by permitting it to remain on Luck’s premises. Lesko subsequently declared bankruptcy and was discharged from the suit. The trial court ruled that, for ACA liability purposes, Luck’s limited involvement with the dog was insufficient to make Luck liable for the dog’s misconduct. The court entered summary judgment for Luck. Whitten appealed to the Illinois Appellate Court.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Welch, J.)
Dissent (Goldenhersh, J.)
What to do next…
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.
