To access this feature, please Log In or Register for your Casebriefs Account.

Add to Library




Katko v. Briney

Law Dictionary

Law Dictionary

Featuring Black's Law Dictionary 2nd Ed.
Font size

Torts Keyed to Dobbs

View this case and other resources at:
Bloomberg Law

Citation. 3 Cal. 69, 1853 Cal.

Brief Fact Summary. Marvin E. Katko (Plaintiff), filed an action for damages resulting from serious injury caused by a shot from a 20-gauge spring shotgun. The shotgun was set by Edward and Bertha Briney (Defendants), in a bedroom of an old farmhouse, which had been uninhabited for several years.

Synopsis of Rule of Law. The value of human life and limb both to an individual and as a matter of public policy outweighs the potential damage to property. Thus, while a defendant may use reasonable force in defense of her property, he has no right to willfully and intentionally injure a trespasser in a manner that may result in loss of life or great bodily injury. The only exception is when the trespasser is committing a violent felony with the potential of endangering human life.

Facts. Defendants inherited an unoccupied farmhouse and over the course of ten years the house was subject to a series of break-ins. The property sustained considerable damage and despite boarding up the windows and posting no trespass signs, the incidents continued. Defendants then set up a shotgun trap, where the gun was secured to an iron bed with its muzzle pointed at the door. A wire was fastened from trigger to doorknob, pointed in such a manner as to wound an intruder’s feet. When Plaintiff, having broken and entered on at least one prior occasion entered, the gun went off, injuring Plaintiff’s right leg. A jury found for the Plaintiff, awarding both actual and punitive damages. Defendants appealed.

Issue. Did Defendants employ a reasonable means of preventing the unlawful entry of trespassers on their property?
See More Course Videos

Create New Group

Casebriefs is concerned with your security, please complete the following