Austin 's case, Ms. Austin 's relationship with Trixie would not rise to the level of keepership set out in the statute. While Ms. Austin would often make sure Trixie had food and water, with the knowledge of she owner Ms. Mercer, and had treats and food for Trixie at her own home that does not itself establish her as the owner of the dog Trixie. Boylan v. Everett, 52 N.E. 541, 542 (Mass. 1899). While the attack occurred on Ms. Austin 's property, simply having Trixie on her property when the damage took place does not in itself make Ms. Austin the keeper. O 'Donnell v. Pollock, 49 N.E. 745 (Mass. 1898). Ms. Austin was walking the dog Trixie around the party to other guests, while she was holding onto the leash and leading the dog, taking a dog for a walk, even with the owner 's knowledge does not establish keepership of the dog. Siira v. Shields, 277 N.E.2d 825 (Mass. 1972). At no point during the party did Ms. Austin assume acknowledged custody over the dog, because handing the leash to Ms. Austin did not establish a clear objective in which Ms. Mercer surrendered custody. Salisbury v. Ferioli, 730 N.E.2d 373, 376 (Mass. 2000). Ms. Clover will probably not be able to prove that Ms. Austin is the keeper of
Austin 's case, Ms. Austin 's relationship with Trixie would not rise to the level of keepership set out in the statute. While Ms. Austin would often make sure Trixie had food and water, with the knowledge of she owner Ms. Mercer, and had treats and food for Trixie at her own home that does not itself establish her as the owner of the dog Trixie. Boylan v. Everett, 52 N.E. 541, 542 (Mass. 1899). While the attack occurred on Ms. Austin 's property, simply having Trixie on her property when the damage took place does not in itself make Ms. Austin the keeper. O 'Donnell v. Pollock, 49 N.E. 745 (Mass. 1898). Ms. Austin was walking the dog Trixie around the party to other guests, while she was holding onto the leash and leading the dog, taking a dog for a walk, even with the owner 's knowledge does not establish keepership of the dog. Siira v. Shields, 277 N.E.2d 825 (Mass. 1972). At no point during the party did Ms. Austin assume acknowledged custody over the dog, because handing the leash to Ms. Austin did not establish a clear objective in which Ms. Mercer surrendered custody. Salisbury v. Ferioli, 730 N.E.2d 373, 376 (Mass. 2000). Ms. Clover will probably not be able to prove that Ms. Austin is the keeper of