Case Citation
Legal Case Name

Irvine v. Rare Feline Breeding Center, Inc. Case Brief

Indiana Court of Appeals1997Docket #2091747
685 N.E.2d 120 1997 Ind. App. LEXIS 1262 1997 WL 564203

Why Top Law Students (And Those Aspiring to Be) Use LSD+ Briefs

Let's be real, law school is a marathon. Our exclusive Flash-to-Full case system is designed by Harvard Law School and MIT grads to match your pace: Quick summaries when you're slammed, detailed analysis when you need to go deep. Only LSD+ offers this kind of flexibility to genuinely fit your study flow.

Adaptive Case Views

Toggle between Flash, Standard, and Expanded. Get what you need, when you need it.

Exam-Ready IRAC Format

We deliver the precise structure professors look for in exam answers.

Complex Cases, Clarified

We break down dense legal reasoning into something digestible, helping you grasp core concepts.

Case Brief Summary & Legal Analysis

General Brief
4 min read

tl;dr: Plaintiff sued for injuries from a tiger attack. The court affirmed denial of plaintiff’s summary judgment, holding that strict liability applies to wild animal cases in Indiana, but defenses like incurred risk are available.

Legal Significance: This case established Indiana’s adoption of the Restatement (Second) of Torts approach to strict liability for harm caused by wild animals, including the recognition of defenses such as incurred risk and the relevance of the plaintiff’s status.

Irvine v. Rare Feline Breeding Center, Inc. Law School Study Guide

Use this case brief structure for your own legal analysis. Focus on the IRAC methodology to excel in law school exams and cold calls.

Case Facts & Court Holding

Key Facts & Case Background

Mosella Schaffer maintained exotic animals, including Siberian tigers, on her farm. Scott Irvine, a friend of Schaffer’s tenant, Bullington, frequently visited the farm over two years with Schaffer’s open invitation and occasionally petted the tigers through a fence. On December 2, 1995, after drinking alcohol and with Bullington having left, Irvine, who had permission to stay overnight, decided to visit the tigers. He accessed the tiger enclosure area by passing through Schaffer’s garage, utility room, and sun room. Irvine then put his fingers through the wire caging to pet a male tiger. When a female tiger caused a commotion, Irvine looked away, and the male tiger pulled his arm through the fence, causing severe injuries. Irvine was aware of a prior incident where the same tiger had grabbed another person’s thumb and had been told during volunteer work at a zoo not to have contact with tigers. Irvine sued Schaffer alleging, inter alia, strict liability. The trial court denied Irvine’s motion for partial summary judgment on the strict liability count.

Court Holding & Legal Precedent

Issue: Does Indiana common law impose strict liability for harm caused by wild animals, and if so, are defenses such as incurred risk available to the defendant?

Yes, Indiana common law imposes strict liability for harm caused by wild Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dol

Master Every Case Faster

Unlock premium legal analysis that helps you quickly understand complex cases, designed by Harvard Law and MIT graduates. It's about working smarter, not just harder.

Start 14-Day Free Trial

Thousands of students are already saving time and gaining clarity. Why not you?

IRAC Legal Analysis

Premium Feature Unlock

Complete IRAC Analysis for Higher Grades

IRAC (Issue, Rule, Analysis, Conclusion) is the exact format professors want to see in your exam answers. Our exclusive Flash-to-Full briefs combine holding, analysis, and rule statements formatted to match what A+ students produce in exams. These structured briefs help reinforce the essential legal reasoning patterns expected in law school.

Legal Issue

Does Indiana common law impose strict liability for harm caused by wild animals, and if so, are defenses such as incurred risk available to the defendant?

Conclusion

This case is significant for formally adopting the Restatement (Second) of Torts Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco labori

Legal Rule

Indiana common law recognizes strict liability for harm caused by wild animals. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in r

Legal Analysis

The court first established that Indiana common law recognized the rule of Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id est laborum. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id est laborum. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id est laborum. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id est laborum. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veni

Flash-to-Full Case Opinions

Flash Summary

  • Indiana formally adopts strict liability for injuries caused by wild animals,
Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident,

Master Every Case Faster

Unlock premium legal analysis that helps you quickly understand complex cases, designed by Harvard Law and MIT graduates. It's about working smarter, not just harder.

Start 14-Day Free Trial

Thousands of students are already saving time and gaining clarity. Why not you?

I object!... to how much coffee I need to function during finals.

✨ Enjoy an ad-free experience with LSD+