| Venue: | MA Supreme Court |
| Facts: | Brown's and Kendall's dogs took to fighting. Kendall picked up a stick to whack them with to separate them, and in the ensuing confusion, Brown got hit in the eye. |
| Posture: | Kendall was the original defandant (assault and battery), but he died, and his executrix was brought in. Appeal from trial finding for the plaintiff. |
| Issue: | At what point is someone responsible for the consequences of unconscious acts? |
| Holding: | Remanded for a new trial. |
| Rule: | If the act was unintentional, it's up to the plaintiff (not the defendant, as the trial judge had charged the jury) to show that due care was present/absent. |
| Reasoning: | The whole idea here is that this was unintentional. There'd be no cause of action if this was te result of pure accident (i.e., random fate, if due care were observed), so the person alleging there was a problem should bear the burden of proof. |
| Dicta: | Trespass in case is the proper remedy here, not trespass. |