Rex v Huggins - Case Note

From The Jolly Contrarian
Revision as of 10:55, 4 November 2016 by Amwelladmin (talk | contribs) (Created page with "A famous case on the subject of a master’s liability for its beasts, in this case Rex, an incontinent beagle — a mansuetae naturae with no known history of urinating o...")
(diff) ← Older revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)
Jump to navigation Jump to search

A famous case on the subject of a master’s liability for its beasts, in this case Rex, an incontinent beagle — a mansuetae naturae with no known history of urinating on his master’s neighbour’s trousers.

Nothing in this case note is true, by the way.