Strict Liability For Wild Animals
Suppose DNA testing proved that the Arizona-Sonora Desert Museum owned the javelina that injured a tourist named Zegerius. The lawsuit was filed in 2009, but a decision was still pending as of 2013. Why would the case likely have been settled earlier if the museum had definitively owned the animal?
AThe tourist should have filed criminal charges because the museum owners knew a dangerous animal was on the premises.
BThe museum would not have been held liable for the animal because it was not kept as a pet.
CThe tourist assumed the risk of injury by paying admission to the museum and therefore could not file a tort claim.
DThe museum would have been held strictly liable for the animal based on ownership, regardless of intent.
Question Leaderboard
Not enough data yet to show leaderboard.