A16-year-old teenager was playing baseball in a sandlot when the ball was hit over his head and into a landowner’s adjacent property. ignoring “beware of dog” signs, the teenager climbed over the fence into the landowner’s yard to retrieve the ball and was attacked by a vicious guard dog belonging to the landowner. the dog bit the teenager, causing him to suffer severe lacerations that required numerous stitches.
if the teenager brings an action against the landowner to recover damages for his injuries, will he likely prevail?
a. yes, because the landowner may not use a vicious dog to protect only his property.
b. yes, because the landowner is strictly liable for injuries caused by the vicious dog.
c. no, because the teenager was trespassing on the landowner's property.
d. no, because the landowner had posted signs warning about the dog.