Last month, the Supreme Court of Georgia issued a written opinion in a dog bite case, explaining which elements a plaintiff must prove in order to be successful. The case presented the court with the opportunity to discuss when a trial judge can make a determination, as a matter of law, that the plaintiff’s case is insufficient. Ultimately, in this case, the court held that the plaintiffs presented sufficient evidence to survive the defendants’ summary judgment challenge.
The Facts of the Case
The plaintiff was bitten by a neighbor’s dog while she was visiting the neighbor in their back yard. The defendants had only had the dog for a little over a week at the time of the attack. Prior to the attack, the dog had snapped at humans twice, once at one of the defendants and once at the plaintiff’s husband. On the day of the attack, the plaintiff entered the defendants’ back yard and approached the dog, which was on a leash. The plaintiff extended her hand gently toward the dog, and the dog lunged at her. As the plaintiff tried to get away, the dog latched onto her leg. The plaintiff and her husband filed a personal injury lawsuit against the defendants.