Hensley

Plaintiff sought to recover damages for an injury sustained when bitten by a dog belonging to defendants. The cause was tried by the court sitting without a jury and from a judgment in favor of plaintiff defendants appeal.

Plaintiff alleged in her complaint that the dog was of “vicious disposition and dangerous character, and evilly disposed toward human beings and other dogs, and accustomed to attack them without provocation, all of which matters were well known to defendants.” The court found that the dog was of a “mischievous disposition and of a dangerous character, and evilly disposed toward other dogs and accustomed to attack them, all of which matters were well known to defendants.” No finding was made relating to any propensity on the part of the.dog to bite or attack human beings. Appellants contend' that the evidence was insufficient to support the -findings and judgment and in our opinion this contention must be sustained.

It appeared that the dog had been owned by appellants for six years. There was no evidence to show that-prior to the day in question the dog had ever bitten or attacked or attempted to bite or attack anyone. Appellants testified that their dog had…