Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

205 Ill. App. 420

Sindak v. Jaskowiak

Appellate Court of Illinois

Decided April 30, 1917

Appellate Court of Illinois · decided 1917-04-30

<p>Abstract of the Decision.</p> <p>1. Animals, § 46*—when verdict for damages for injuries from hite of dog is not excessive. A verdict for $900, reduced by remittitur to $600, held not excessive where a man was bitten in the leg by the defendant’s dog, and where the leg bled profusely and the laceration of the muscles caused a permanent condition, and plaintiff was under the care of a physician for nearly three months and suffered an actual loss of twenty weeks’ time at $18 a week.</p> <p>2. Animals, § 43*—when evidence is sufficient to sustain judgment for injuries to person by dog. In an action to recover for personal injuries sustained by plaintiff as the result of being bitten by a dog of the defendant, where it appeared that the plaintiff was visiting at a house located in the rear of the lot on which the defendant’s saloon was located; that as he was leaving the premises, the dog, which was being led by a chain, jumped up and bit plaintiff, and that the vicious character of the dog was Imown to the defendant, held that the judgment in favor of the plaintiff would not be disturbed.</p>

Affirmed · Decided 1917-04-30

Mr. Presiding Justice McSurely

¶1delivered the opinion of the court.

2. Animals, § 43*—when evidence is sufficient to sustain judgment for injuries to person by dog. In an action to recover for personal injuries sustained by plaintiff as the result of being bitten by a dog of the defendant, where it appeared that the plaintiff was visiting at a house located in the rear of the lot on which the defendant’s saloon was located; that as he was leaving the premises, the dog, which was being led by a chain, jumped up and bit plaintiff, and that the vicious character of the dog was Imown to the defendant, held that the judgment in favor of the plaintiff would not be disturbed.
/205/illapp/420 · .json · Public domain