Case / Legal Brief for Katko V. Briney
In this hub I will go through how to write a law brief for the case Katko V. Briney. It will include each of the standard criteria needed for an accurate law brief.
The main legal concept in Katko V. Briney, a landowner may protect personal property in an unoccupied house against trespassers with a spring gun, capable of producing deadly force, or serious injury.
On July 16, 1967 plaintiff Katko, and accomplice McDonough entered the property of Briney. The home was vacant, and decrepit, but still continued to enter the residence.While inside the plaintiff opened the bedroom door and got shot by a 20 gauge spring shotgun, which had been set up as a trap to keep out intruders. This is where the court case began.
The plaintiff katko is suing Briney. They are suing them because of damages caused to themselves while breaking and entering the house of Briney. The plaintiffs would like the court to give actually and punitive damages money to them.
Should the defendant be held responsible for damages when defending his home from a person breaking and entering on the property with intention of stealing.
The court decided in favor of the plaintiff for this reasoning. A person has no right to defend their home with a deadly or seriously fatal weapon, unless they are personally in a life threatening stance. Therefore the court was found in favor of the plaintiff in the lower courts. And after consideration, the defendants appeal to a higher court has shown no reason for reversible error.