McMahan

Johnson v. McMahan

Good Law
1998 Cal. App. LEXIS 999·68 Cal. App. 4th 173·80 Cal. Rptr. 2d 173·98 Daily Journal DAR 12213·98 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 8808
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaDecember 1, 1998B115029California1,049 words

Opinion

Opinion

Epstein, J.

The sole issue in this case is whether the California dog bite statute, Civil Code section 3342, applies when the bitee does not suffer a wound. It does. The trial court ruled otherwise, granting defendants’ motion for summary adjudication. Plaintiff was unsuccessful in his other causes of action, and suffered an adverse judgment from which he appeals. Beyond this statement, we eschew word play opportunities offered by the factual context of the case. (See Phillips v. San Luis Obispo County Dept. etc. Regulation (1986) 183 Cal.App.3d 372, 374 [ 228 Cal.Rptr. 101 ]; Edwards v. Superior Court (1991) 230 Cal.App.3d 173 175, fn. 3 [ 281 Cal.Rptr. 30 ].)

Factual and Procedural Summary

Plaintiff Bradley Johnson volunteered to repair a swamp cooler on the roof of the residence occupied by Robert and Jacqueline McMahan, the defendants. Plaintiff was on a ladder when Timber, defendants’ five-month-old German Shepherd dog, jumped at him. Timber’s jaws closed on plaintiff’s trousers. Plaintiff presented evidence that his leg was between the parts of his pants impacted by the dog’s jaws. He admitted that the skin was not broken. As a result of the dog’s action, plaintiff fell from…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.