## Facts

- Corinne Marsalis was shopping in Shelby P. La Salle’s grocery store when a Siamese cat (kept as the pet of La Salle’s minor son) bit or scratched her.
- Concerned about rabies, James R. Marsalis asked La Salle to confine the cat for 14 days for observation so Mrs. Marsalis could avoid unnecessary rabies prophylaxis.
- The trial court credited plaintiffs’ testimony that La Salle agreed to lock up and observe the cat for the requested period; La Salle denied making that promise.
- La Salle made no meaningful effort to secure the cat, and within several days it escaped and remained missing for about a month.
- Because the cat could not be observed, Mrs. Marsalis underwent a series of rabies injections and suffered complications, including an adverse reaction requiring hospitalization.
- When the cat later returned, it showed no signs of rabies.
- The trial court awarded Mrs. Marsalis $3,000 for injuries and Mr. Marsalis about $350 for medical expenses; La Salle appealed.

## Issues

1. Whether a person who voluntarily agrees to take a precautionary action for another’s protection assumes a legal duty to exercise reasonable care in performing that undertaking.
2. Whether La Salle’s failure to use reasonable care to confine the cat was a proximate cause of injuries resulting from rabies treatment undertaken after the cat escaped.

## Decision

- The court affirmed the judgment for plaintiffs.
- The court held that even if La Salle initially had no obligation to confine the cat, his agreement to do so created a duty to use reasonable care in carrying out the undertaking.
- The court found La Salle breached that duty by failing to take reasonable steps to keep the cat secured and observed.
- The court held the cat’s escape foreseeably led to Mrs. Marsalis’s decision to undergo rabies prophylaxis, making La Salle’s negligence a proximate cause of her treatment-related injuries.
- The damages awards were upheld as supported by the evidence.

## Legal Principles

- A defendant who voluntarily undertakes to render aid or take protective measures for another must exercise reasonable care in performing the undertaking.
- Liability may attach for harms proximately caused by negligent performance of an assumed undertaking, including foreseeable medical treatment undertaken because the defendant’s negligence prevents risk assessment.
- Negligence liability for a voluntarily assumed duty does not depend on proof that an animal had known vicious propensities when the duty arises from the undertaking rather than from keeping a dangerous animal.

## Conclusion

By agreeing to confine and observe the cat to allow rabies risk evaluation, La Salle assumed a duty to act with reasonable care; his failure to secure the cat, leading to its disappearance, foreseeably caused Mrs. Marsalis to undergo rabies treatment and suffer compensable injuries, warranting affirmance of the plaintiffs’ judgment.


Marsalis v. La Salle, 94 So. 2d 120 (La. Ct. App. 1957)