In December 1996, a jury trial was held. At trial, the district court instructed the jury to apply the negligence standard of care. The jury found neither party negligent. Hassan argues the district court erred in denying summary judgment and applying a negligent standard of care. Because the damage to her automobile occurred outside a grazing area, Hassan argues Brooks is strictly liable for the damage caused to her vehicle.
Statutory interpretation is a question of law fully reviewable on appeal.
The primary goal in construing a statute is to ascertain the legislature's intent. To ascertain the legislative intent, we first look to the language of the statute. When the language of a statute is ambiguous we may use extrinsic aids. In Hennenfent, the plaintiff, who had also collided with cattle on Highway 83, argued the defendant breached his statutory duty under N.D.R.C. 36-1107. Instead, determining N.D.R.C. 36-1107 was a herd law intended to protect the state's chief industries, cattle raising and agriculture, the Court held a livestock owner's duty to a motor vehicle fell outside the statute and should be measured under the rule of due care.