Bloomer v. Shauger

Decided 2012-04-12

Cited by 262 later decision(s) in our corpus · see the citation network in Lexace

Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this case

From the opinion

Garry, J. (dissenting). I respectfully dissent, finding the majority analysis unduly narrow in defining the animal’s known propensities relative to the manner of the injury. This horse, clearly in a highly agitated state at the time of the underlying events, had an established propensity for avoiding lead lines. When the owner approached with the lead line, the horse responded in a manner entirely consistent with this propensity…

Read the full opinion (source) ↗


Lexace provides legal information, not legal advice, and no attorney–client relationship is created. Citation figures are counts of later citing opinions in our corpus and may be incomplete; always read and Shepardize the full opinion before relying on it.