Also known as: wild creatures · ferae naturae · wild animal
Written by attorneys · grounded in primary & secondary sources — see below
An animal that is not by custom devoted to the service of mankind at the time and in the place in which it is kept. A possessor of such an animal faces strict liability for harm it causes even when utmost care was exercised to prevent escape or injury.
Wanda Williams kept a tiger in a reinforced enclosure on her property. Despite installing multiple locks and daily inspections, the tiger escaped through an undetected flaw and injured Winston West on a neighboring lot. Winston sues Wanda for the injuries.
Walter Washington visited a wildlife sanctuary run by Whitney White. Signs and staff warnings made clear that a bear roamed a restricted zone. Walter knowingly entered the zone to take photographs and was attacked. He now sues for his injuries.
Select any source to read its text and confirm it supports the definition.
Winona Walsh allowed her friend to house a wolf on her rural acreage even though she never took possession of the animal. The wolf later attacked a delivery driver on the property. The driver seeks recovery from Winona.
Whitney Washington kept a fox in a backyard pen for personal enjoyment. When the fox bit a neighbor's child, the neighbor sued claiming strict liability. The court must decide whether the fox qualifies as a wild creature under the applicable standard.
Winston West climbed a locked gate marked "Employees Only" at a conservation center to photograph wolves. One wolf escaped its enclosure and attacked him. He sues the center under a strict-liability theory for wild animals.
Wanda Williams operated a wildlife sanctuary and knew a coyote had escaped through a loose panel two weeks earlier. She delayed permanent repairs. Ivan, a known trespasser, entered through a gap and was bitten by the same coyote. He sues for negligence.
No. A possessor of land is not subject to strict liability to one who intentionally or negligently trespasses for harm done by a wild animal kept on the land, even if the trespasser had no reason to know the animal was present.
Supporting sources
The possessor's negligence in failing to prevent harm from the wild animal is judged under the same rules that apply to other artificial conditions or activities on the land.
Supporting sources
The plaintiff's contributory negligence in knowingly and unreasonably subjecting himself to the risk that a wild animal will do harm is a defense to the strict liability.
Supporting sources
Yes. One who, although not in possession, harbors a wild animal is subject to the same liability as if he were in possession of it.
Supporting sources
A wild animal is one that is not by custom devoted to the service of mankind at the time and in the place in which it is kept, while a domestic animal is one that is so devoted.
Supporting sources
…in and bear off the object of pursuit? Writers on general law differ as to what acts will suffice to acquire dominion over a wild animal. After mature deliberation I embrace the view of Barbeyrac as most rational and least liable to objection. Property in animals feræ naturæ may be acquired without bodily touch or…