| http://www.w3.org/ns/prov#value | - Cases such as Williams and White v. Leeder, supra, at 149 Wis.2d 948, 440 N.W.2d 557, exemplify the precept, consistent with the Restatement view, that ???[k]nowledge by an owner of the vicious propensities of his or her particular animal is not always essential to a recovery in an action for injuries alleged to have been caused by the owner's negligence.
|
