Section 12.35 A Domestic Animal Was Possessed With a Tendency to Injure Persons or Damage Property

• Library: Tort Law 2016

(1) (§12.35) A Domestic Animal Was Possessed With a Tendency to Injure Persons or Damage Property

To recover under a strict liability theory, the plaintiff must first prove that the animal had a dangerous propensity or was "vicious" or "ferocious." The burden to produce evidence of this dangerousness is on the plaintiff. Boyer v. Callahan, 406 S.W.2d 805 (Mo. App. E.D. 1966). This element can be established absent any prior attacks or attempted attacks by the animal. See, e.g., Speckmann v. Kreig, 79 Mo. App. 376 (E.D. 1899). The plaintiff does not need to prove that the animal was malicious, savage, or ill-natured, only that the animal has the propensity to act in a way that may injure person or property. See:

· Frazier v. Stone, 515 S.W.2d 766 (Mo. App. S.D. 1974)

· Bush v. Anderson, 360 S.W.2d 251 (Mo. App. E.D. 1962)

· Dansker v. Gelb, 352 S.W.2d 12 (Mo.

...