Defendant left on his land tractors which could easily be started by children in the neighborhood who, defendant knew, frequently trespassed and played on the machines. A boy of ten inadvertently started one of the machines and then jumped to safety, but the tractor proceeded through a building on defendant's land, down a hill, across a street, and into and through the plaintiff's house a block away, causing the damage for which she sues. The trial court charged that to justify recovery for the plaintiff the jury must find not only that defendant was negligent, and that his negligence was the proximate cause of the harm, but also that the tractor was an "attractive nuisance." Defendant appeals from a judgment on the verdict for plaintiff. Held, affirmed, for while the attractive nuisance doctrine did not apply to the facts of this case, the error was not prejudicial. Bronk v. Davenny, (Wash. 1946) 171 P. (2d) 237.

Included in

Torts Commons