Although Sharon violated the statute, was the statute intended to guard against the risk of this type of injury? Reconsider Gorris v. Scott on page 210 (the sheep pen case). Was the statute there intended to prevent sheep from being washed overboard? No. It was intended to prevent sheep from getting contagious diseases.

What was the reason for the horn blowing statute in this case? We'll probably never know for certain. But is it likely that it was designed to prevent water department workers or others on the street? Isn't it more likely that it was designed to protect hospital patients from unnecessary noise? If so, how should this case be resolved?
Return to assignment 4.