Dog Bite: To Sue Or Not To Sue

[Wonderboy]

Just to avoid any future confusion
my property is now posted.....

<b> Entering this property
entails certain risks including
but not limited to death
dismemberment and being
eaten alive in a most painful
manner. By entering this
property you agree to hold
the owners, their hiers,
executors and assigns
harmless for any and all
injuries and property damage
incurred and agree to pay
any and all legal fees and
court costs associated
with said injuries
or damage. </b>

Fred

 

[brownclown]

While UPS may not own Liberty Mutual technically, there is a symbiotic relationship there that can't be denied. Over time, UPS has become the grease for Liberty Mutual's wheel and vice versa perhaps. Liberty Mutual's responsibility is to keep UPS's financial losses to a minimum which often leaves the victim (ie plaintiff, employee, customer, injured or whatever) caught in the middle, oftentimes with no recourse but to sue in order to recover damages or losses. While I've got no horse in this race (I've already stated I won't be suing), I can see where an individual could be left holding the short end of the stick. Report and document everything as soon as possible and you'll lessen your chances of being that individual.

 

[browniehound]

What baffles me is that UPS counts a dogbite as injury. So if you injure yourself once on the job and they get bitten by a dog at a later date, you'll be labeled a repeater. And once that happens, you'll be scrutininzed for the rest of your career in regards to safety.

 

[dannyboy]

So? And does that affect the bottom line how? That is an internal thing, and really has no bearing on how you do your job. At the very worst, they will ride with you once a quarter and maybe follow you around once in a while.

It is an internal thing that liberty and UPS have come up with to keep them in jobs for the next 50 years.

d

 

[dannyboy]

Fred, what you posted is not worth the paper it is written on. If you were really a lawyer, you would know that.

Care to site case law? Like how the parents of an 8 year old can not be responsible for what he/she does? Or how the insurance of the property owners can not be sued because of the actions of the 8 year old?

Come on now, its put up or shut up time.

Lets see what ya got!

Best Regards

d

 

[dannyboy]

Fred

Ill bet you went to school with Gary Peel a lawyer from Ill. Seems like he was battling and ex wife over alimony and filed for bankruptcy to reduce her chances of getting anything.

Seems like she challenged his filing when he allegedly trying to blackmail her into silence.

According to federal charges against him filed in march, he told his ex-wife that unless she relented, he would shock her elderly parents by giving then decades old nude photos of him with the ex wifes younger sister.

However, Mr. Peel perhaps forgot that the sister was allegedly on 16 when the photos were taken, and he has been charged with possessing child pornography.

Y'all musta graduated together at the top of the class.

Best regards

d

 

[Threshold]

If my 8 year old kid let one of our family pets out of the house without my permission and an intruding stranger on my property was bitten...

I would say "badd doggie" and shake my finger at it for doing it's job and
that would be the end of it........

but if that stranger filed a law suit against me or theatened me in any way....

I would definately file a restraining order against him (or in this case ...if necessary... his employer ...the ENTIRE COMPANY of UPS)....

and that would just be a start......

But this stranger is doing a service for you, that YOU REQUESTED.

If the 8 year old let the dog out, the person who should be sued is the one who is ultimately responsible. The homeowner and/or the parents.

You should sue them. They knew full well a UPS delivery was imminent, yet they did not take the proper precautions to ensure the safety of the person that was providing the service they requested.

 

[over9five]

The homeowner is the captain of the ship. He's ultimately responsible for the actions of everyone on board.

 

[toonertoo]

Posting a Beware of dog sign does not release you from liability, it merely means you have a dog that you know is aggressive. It makes the law suit much easier to win. So wonderboy, post on.

 

[dannyboy]

Yeah its like the trucks that haul gravel having signs on the back "not responsible for items falling from truck". Yeah right. You are always responsible for items falling from your vehicle.

I guess that is one of the things wrong with todays society. People do not want to be responsible for their actions. Blame it on something or someone else, but it sure as heck aint my fault.

d

 

[Wonderboy]

Posting a Beware of dog sign does not release you from liability, it merely means you have a dog that you know is aggressive. It makes the law suit much easier to win. So wonderboy, post on.

Does my sign say "beware of dog" No it doesn't. I don't even have a dog. You people twist around the facts to fit a completely different senario than what actually happened to fit your agenda.

By your logic any "no hunting or trespassing" sign is null and void because it implies the land owner knows his land has game and therefore it's permissable to trespass and hunt because the warning was posted and "isn't worth the paper it's printed on".

Doofis boy keeps coming back with stories that have nothing to do with the original post and nothing to do with what I say. What does his mamma's divorce have to do with my legal expertise?

The owner of the dog in this particular situation took proper steps by bringing his dog inside his house. His 8 year old child negligently opened the door and allowed the dog to escape.

I repeat.....parents cannot be sued for the negligent act of an 8 year old child. If you have a specific example of this ever occurring, please post that information instead of repeating your matra that it does.

I am getting bored with giving you amateurs free legal advice that you don't even understand or appreciate. Please give me factual information that refutes what I say or I will consider this case closed

Fred

 

[laborer]

I am getting bored with giving you amateurs free legal advice that you don't even understand or appreciate. Please give me factual information that refutes what I say or I will consider this case closed
Fred

I'm just an amateur but I found these articles about Parental accountability....

The U.S. law

There is a political movement for greater parental accountability following of a number of highly publicised violent crimes committed by children. While all US states allow parents to be sued for the various actions of their children, the idea of criminal legislation to enable the prosecution of adults for “neglectful” parenting is relatively new. For example, a number of states have enacted or proposed laws that will:

* automatically hold parents financially responsible for all expenses associated with a second false bomb threat or 911 call made by a child;
* impose a prison term of up to 18 months and order payment of restitution to any victims if the child commits a serious crime;
* imposes a fine and/or a prison term if a child uses a gun owned by the parent to commit a crime
* fine and/or imprison parents whose children fail to attend school or skip school more than 10 times in a year.

Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parental_responsibility_(criminal)"

 

[dannyboy]

Freddie sweetie, I knew you were a fraud when you posted earlier. And the fact that you cant give any clear case law shows you are full of crap. Much like ex Atty Peel. Im Guessing your twin brother?

It does not matter how the dog got out. Even if the child did not let the dog out, the owner would be liable.

d

 

[dannyboy]

no hunting or trespassing" sign is null and void because it implies the land owner knows his land has game and therefore it's permissible to trespass and hunt because the warning was posted and "isn't worth the paper it's printed on

In an ideal world, those signs would mean something. But if you have any common sense, you know that if you put a sign like that every 6 inches around your property, and I go over the 8 foot chain link fence topped with razor wire, and fall and hurt myself, I can sue you and I will win. Even though I am trespassing. Been done too many times. It ain't right, but it is the law.

Which again shows you are not what you pretend to be.

But thats OK, we will all sit around and marvel at your legal expertise. We want you to feel good about yourself.

You ask for case law, but I asked for it first. You first baby!

As for the free legal advice, it aint even worth that price.

d

 

[Wonderboy]

I'm just an amateur but I found these articles about Parental accountability....

The U.S. law

There is a political movement for greater parental accountability following of a number of highly publicised violent crimes committed by children.

A Doofis boy wannabe posts about an unrelated political movement and tries to change the subject again.

and the original Doofis boy wants more free legal advice from me because he can't find any examples of a parent being sued for the negligent act of an 8 year old child. It's obvious who the fraud is here.

If you want specifics from me I'll need a retainer.

Do you have a PayPal account dboy? If not...this case is closed!

Fred

 

[moreluck]

The 8 yr. old here is not the point. Dog bites man. Dog's owner is responsible. Period, the end!!

 

[just another driver]

How come USPS get to carry dog mace on their belt? Anybody knows how strong those are and whats preventing us from carrying one?

 

[Wonderboy]

The 8 yr. old here is not the point. Dog bites man. Dog's owner is responsible. Period, the end!!

why? because you say so? Prove It!

Fred

 

[toonertoo]

All I know wonder boy is I was told never to post a beware of dog sign, (by an attorney) as it is an admision that you have a viscious animal. No trespassing and no hunting on someones personal property is a law, not a warning. I do pay attention to them but some people put them up to keep people away, and it works on me. I wish they would put a NI beware of dog, in our board, i'd use it alot. So much for this issue, for me. Dog owner is responsible, if you cant be responsible, good reason not to have a dog.

 

[tieguy]

If my 8 year old kid let one of our family pets out of the house without my permission and an intruding stranger on my property was bitten...
I would say "badd doggie" and shake my finger at it for doing it's job and
that would be the end of it........
but if that stranger filed a law suit against me or theatened me in any way....
I would definately file a restraining order against him (or in this case ...if necessary... his employer ...the ENTIRE COMPANY of UPS)....
and that would just be a start......

Meanwhile I would keep a log of all the pain and suffering I encurred as a result of this dog bite. Get me a good lawyer and take your house and property for your negligence. At that point i suppose I could remove your dog and the restraining order.