A dog is an open and obvious danger that relieves the landlord of responsibility?

 Leroy Allen sued A & M Properties after he was bit by a dog with known vicious propensities on the front porch of a duplex owned by A & M.  Apparently A & M had purchased insurance coverage for premises liability but not for dog ownership, as Allen's attorneys took a default judgment against the dog owner, and dismissed all but his "safe premises" claim.  In a fairly confusing opinion, the Court held that the dog  was an "open and obvious" danger, even though it broke through a tenant's apartment window to attack Allen in a common area.