[IYAS9YAS]

No, we couldn't possibly hold the owner of the cherished pet responsible, could we? It has to be the deepest pockets. A reasonable person would say that the store lets people bring their pets in with them. A reasonable person would also have to say that pets are likely to releive themselves in said store. A reasonable person would then conclude that it pays to keep an eye out where one walks.

[Iwo Jima]

And a group of reasonable people called jurors may well determine that. This case could and should have been the subject of a one day jury trial. The courts do no one a favor when an imperial judge tries to circumvent the right to a jury trial, costing the litigants and the taxpayers the expense and time necessary for an appeal and THEN a jury trial.

[Xenalyte]

Actually, a reasonable pet owner would make sure the dog in question relieves himself outside the store before entry. The Dread Boston Salty and I stay outside for several minutes sometimes, to make sure he's empty.