Katko v. Briney, 183 N.W.2d 657 (Iowa 1971)

• Why did the court uphold the verdict in favor of the defendant trespasser (despite trespass being both a criminal and tortious act)?
• Do you think there should be limits to allowing trespassers to recover for injuries? Why or why not? Do you think the outcome of the verdict might have been different if the house had been occupied? Why or why not?
• What other solutions might the property owner have looked to to protect his property without incurring liability to potential trespassers?
• Cite and summarize your jurisdiction's rule regarding defense of property as a defense to intentional tort liability.