Hyatt v Anoka Police Department Minnesota 691 N W 2d 824 Minn 2005 Summary Plaintiff sued the Anoka Police Department after she was injured by a police dog in the attempted arrest of her husband Plaintiff s claim was based on a Minnesota Statute that requires strict liability for injuries caused by a dog so long as the dog was not provoked and the victim was acting peaceably in a place she was lawfully entitled to be The City moved for dismissal on the theory that the statute did not apply to police dogs The trial court held the statute does apply to police dogs and that the City was not immune from suit The Court of Appeals reversed granting summary judgment to the City and holding application of the statute to the City clearly produces an absurd result The Supreme Court of Minnesota reversed again holding that application of the statute to the City did not produce an absurd result Judge Hanson delivered the opinion of the court Opinion of the Court Appellant Lena Hyatt sued the City of Anoka and its police department collectively the City after she was injured by a police dog during the attempted arrest of her husband Hyatt s complaint alleged liability solely on the basis of Minn Stat 347 22 2004 the dog bite statute which holds a dog owner strictly liable for injuries caused by the dog so long as the dog was not provoked and the victim was acting peaceably in a place where she had a lawful right to be The City moved for summary judgment asserting that the dog bite statute did not apply to police dogs and in the alternative that the City was immune and that the police department is not a legal entity subject to suit The district court denied the City s motion but the court of appeals reversed holding that it would be absurd to apply the dog bite statute to police dogs because police officers are authorized by statute to use reasonable force Hyatt v Anoka Police Dep t 680 N W 2d 115 119 20 Minn App 2004 The court of appeals declined to address the City s immunity claims Id at 120 We reverse the decision of the court of appeals on the dog bite statute and remand to the court of appeals with directions to consider the City s immunity claims and the propriety of naming the police department as a defendant At approximately 1 30 a m on May 21 2002 four law enforcement officers arrived at a residence in St Francis Minnesota to execute arrest warrants for Andrew Hyatt who had been charged with a controlled substance crime fleeing a police officer and driving after revocation The homeowner told the officers that Andrew Hyatt and his wife appellant Lena Hyatt were living in a two story red barn behind the residence After entering the barn through an unlocked door the officers heard movement on the barn s second level Sheriff s Deputy Paul Lenzmeier called for Andrew Hyatt to come out After receiving no response Lenzmeier and Deputy Todd Diegnau went upstairs and observed two people in bed covered with a blanket Lenzmeier called out again and noticed that the male whom police later identified to be Andrew Hyatt was awake After Andrew Hyatt ignored Lenzmeier s order to show his hands Lenzmeier pulled down the covers in an effort to reveal any weapons The other person in bed was Lena Hyatt According to deposition testimony and the deputies departmental reports Andrew Hyatt jumped from the bed yelled something similar to Go ahead just shoot me shoot me and lunged toward the deputies Andrew Hyatt struck Diegnau and Lenzmeier called downstairs for assistance from Anoka Police Officer Mark Yates who came upstairs with his police dog Chips on a leash Yates saw Diegnau s bloodied face and Andrew Hyatt standing behind Lena Hyatt as he yelled Shoot me shoot me Lenzmeier believed that Lena Hyatt might have been act ing as a shield for her husband When Andrew Hyatt ran toward the back of the room Yates released Chips Instead of pursuing Andrew Hyatt Chips apprehended Lena Hyatt taking her to the ground and performing a bite and hold on her left leg and right arm With the animal holding Lena Hyatt Yates pursued Andrew Hyatt who fled through a second story window When Yates later re entered the room he released Chips from Lena Hyatt and instructed Lenzmeier to handcuff and arrest her on suspicion of obstruction of legal process Lena Hyatt was taken by ambulance to a Coon Rapids hospital and treated for a 2 inch laceration on her right elbow and a 5 inch laceration on her left knee Hyatt sued the City seeking compensation for medical costs and pain Her complaint alleged liability on the sole basis of the dog bite statute which reads If a dog without provocation attacks or injures any person who is acting peaceably in any place where the person may lawfully be the owner of the dog is liable in damages to the person so attacked or injured to the full amount of the injury sustained The term owner includes any person harboring or keeping a dog but the owner shall be primarily liable The term dog includes both male and female of the canine species Minn Stat 347 22 The City moved for summary judgment arguing that the dog bite statute does not apply to police dogs In the alternative the City argued that it was entitled to statutory and vicarious official immunity The City also argued that the police department was not a legal entity and thus was improperly joined as a defendant The district court denied the City s motion ruling that the dog bite statute applies to municipal owners of police dogs because the statute does not explicitly exempt police dogs The district court also ruled that because the specific use of a police dog was operational the City was not entitled to immunity The court did not address the question of the propriety of the joinder of the police department as a defendant Before the court of appeals the City argued that applying the dog bite statute to municipal owners of police dogs clearly produces an absurd result It relied on the guideline for statutory construction contained in Minn Stat 645 17 1 2004 which provides that the legislature does not intend a result that is absurd impossible of execution or unreasonable A divided court of appeals agreed and ordered summary judgment for the City Hyatt 680 N W 2d at 119 20 The court did not address the immunity or proper party issues because they were moot Id at 120 We granted Hyatt s petition for review on whether the dog bite statute applies to municipal owners of police dogs On appeal from summary judgment we review whether the district
View Full Document
Unlocking...