- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: My baby girl got attacked by a dog
Posted on 2/1/13 at 9:55 am to UpToPar
Posted on 2/1/13 at 9:55 am to UpToPar
quote:
I'm saying his lawyer should be worrying about this right now, not him.
meh, from what meaux said, I'd be furious at the situation with the woman already yacking her head off saying its not their fault while his daughter is laying their with that nasty open wound. She kick started the war, SHOCK AND AWE TIME BITCHES.
1
Posted on 2/1/13 at 9:56 am to BarDTiger81
quote:See, I never said that. I just questioned some of the statements of other posters. The key language is, "...caused by the dog and which the owner could have prevented..."
Why do you not think he has a legit claim?
We could spend 12 pages on "could have prevented". It's really not an interesting conversation. Ultimately, whatever a judge or jury decides is likely to stand up on appeal.
Posted on 2/1/13 at 9:56 am to Chad504boy
quote:
SHOCK AND AWE TIME BITCHES.
Posted on 2/1/13 at 9:58 am to Chad504boy
quote:my lawyer is notified for any altercation that goes on with my family and is brought in as counsel to document what needs documenting.
oh its not? then why did MJ have the lawyer at the ER?
Posted on 2/1/13 at 9:59 am to AlxTgr
quote:
The key language is, "...caused by the dog and which the owner could have prevented..."
Yep, and that's why the dog being chained up hurts the case if anything. It shows that there were steps taken to prevent it. The question is whether those steps constituted a reasonable attempt to prevent it.
Also, remember dog bites are strict liability, therefore owners knowledge of the dogs tendencies to bite is not an element that needs to be shown.
Posted on 2/1/13 at 10:01 am to AlxTgr
Louisiana has strict liability for injuries caused by dogs, fwiw. Meaning that negligence doesn't have to be shown, only cause and damages. OF COURSE, in practice it's more complicated than that, but thats the gist of it.
Posted on 2/1/13 at 10:01 am to meauxjeaux2
quote:
my lawyer is notified for any altercation that goes on with my family and is brought in as counsel to document what needs documenting.
which is very wise. being concerned about your daughter's welfare and being involved in your legal steps to protect your family's interest are not mutually exclusive.
Posted on 2/1/13 at 10:02 am to Chad504boy
quote:exactly.
being concerned about your daughter's welfare and being involved in your legal steps to protect your family's interest are not mutually exclusive.
I'll let him handle that legal shite since I'm pretty law ignorant myself.
Posted on 2/1/13 at 10:02 am to UpToPar
quote:
It shows that there were steps taken to prevent it. The question is whether those steps constituted a reasonable attempt to prevent it.
So chaining the dog in the front yard where the kids were playing and is able to hide under a car out of sight from children running around is hardly reasonable steps IMO. In reality, the dog was chained up most likely to prevent the bitch from running away, not to prevent the dog from harming a kid.
Posted on 2/1/13 at 10:03 am to USMCTiger03
quote:Yeah, it's not like I didn't just quote directly from the statute.
Louisiana has strict liability for injuries caused by dogs, fwiw. Meaning that negligence doesn't have to be shown, only cause and damages.
I handle these BTW.
Posted on 2/1/13 at 10:05 am to Chad504boy
quote:
In reality, the dog was chained up most likely to prevent the bitch from running away, not to prevent the dog from harming a kid.
Probably
quote:
So chaining the dog in the front yard where the kids were playing and is able to hide under a car out of sight from children running around is hardly reasonable steps IMO
Without knowing the facts it's hard to say.
Posted on 2/1/13 at 10:08 am to UpToPar
quote:
Without knowing the facts it's hard to say.
well its hard to say with the facts similar to slip and fall cases. But in my opinion (not that legal) when you know you have kids running around on your property... you have to assume nothing when taking responsibility for the actions of your animals and so forth.
Posted on 2/1/13 at 10:08 am to Chad504boy
Mostplaces have leash laws. If I'm in the front yard for an extended period of time, I'll often leash my dog out there with me. In order of importance: law>protect the dumb-arse dog from cars>prevent bites. I say that because she's never bitten anything that wasn't a rodent or marsupial.
Posted on 2/1/13 at 10:08 am to AlxTgr
quote:
Yeah, it's not like I didn't just quote directly from the statute.
You did a poor job of explaining it. Get over yourself.
Posted on 2/1/13 at 10:09 am to AlxTgr
quote:
AlxTgr
Generally speaking when looking at the facts from a judge or jury's perspective... does the victim being a kid change the facts of a case pretty drastically? Not that the judge feels sorry for the kid but that it puts more burden on the animal's owner on taking responsibility of how things are handled?
Posted on 2/1/13 at 10:09 am to Chad504boy
right. Main issue would be length of the chain, where the children were playing, and where the dog was chained.
Posted on 2/1/13 at 10:11 am to meauxjeaux2
Sorry to hear that. I hope she gets better soon.
Posted on 2/1/13 at 10:13 am to USMCTiger03
quote:Not my fault you're continually impersonating a lawyer here. Me get over myself?
You did a poor job of explaining it. Get over yourself.
fricking moron.Posted on 2/1/13 at 10:14 am to Chad504boy
quote:I cannot answer that.
Generally speaking when looking at the facts from a judge or jury's perspective... does the victim being a kid change the facts of a case pretty drastically? Not that the judge feels sorry for the kid but that it puts more burden on the animal's owner on taking responsibility of how things are handled?
Posted on 2/1/13 at 10:19 am to AlxTgr
how about this article?
quote:LINK
WATSON- A young girl is recovering after a pit bull bit her over the weekend. Livingston Parish Deputies said the dog was chained up and behind a fence when the attack happened. "The child was in the vicinity of the dog, which was restrained, it was inside a fenced in area, not real sure what happened but the end result, the child had a pretty serious injury," said Perry Rushing with the Livingston Parish Sheriff's Office. Deputies cited the owner of the dog charging them with unlawful ownership of a dangerous dog, because they believe the dog was unprovoked when it bit the girl. Officials say, even though the dog was restrained, the owner is still on the hook for its actions. "You're still responsible, you have to make extra sure that the child is protected from your animal even if you suspect nothing like this could ever happen, it's still your responsibility as a pet owner to protect anybody who's on your property from your animals," said Rushing. A judge will decide if the dog should be euthanized.
Page 6 of 12
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News