Jerseygirl

From what you have said about how the family reacted to the woman who was walking thro their property, I would just be a little worried about 'opening up a can of worms' if you take this matter further. Your neighbour may be a bit of a physco. :scared: After all this is America.

User Name

As a general rule, once the statute of limitations (SOL) has run on a possible cause of action, the plaintiff will likely be unable to sustain legal action. A victim of a vicious dog attack might seek advice from a competent lawyer in their state who should be aware of the SOL issue.

Disclaimer: for general discussion purposes only. No warranty express or implied. I am not your attorney. If you desire legal advice, then seek appropriate legal counsel in your state.

Terrier

No I don't. Why should I, I just warn people when they come up wanting to pet him. He was abused as puppy and will bite. 36 hours from getting put down before I saved him, loves me and the wife. Just hates everything else in sight. He deserves another chance, he can;t be blamed for his other owners neglect?

Leslie

Then it is your responsibility to separate him from the rest of society.

Ray

Keep him up in chicago then...We shoot dangerous dogs on sight ..

Jerseygirl

No he can't be blamed for his previous owners neglect. By your own admission you have stated that he is viscious and is likely to bite if approached, therefore, for your dog's sake you should have him muzzled when he is outside. If he were to bite someone then he would be destroyed and that would be your fault as you knew that this could happen. Plse be a responsible dog owner and don't let your dog down like his previous owner did.

dunroving

- because he is a dangerous dog!

- oh, and you think that is "enough"?

- and therefore you should take more apporpriate safeguards to make sure he doesn't get the chance, FOR HIS SAKE.

- good for you. I saved a dog that was a "lost cause" too, and I wish more people would do that instead of buying dogs from pet shops. However, the first thing I did was train my dog in sociable behavior. Most dogs are trainable, and those that are not should be muzzled while in public.

ladylisa

But you've already told us that people dont listen to you when you ask them not to approach so stop being an idiot and get the dog muzzled. My dog was attacked by a Pit bull that was defending its territory the only problem was the dog lived in a condo with communal grounds. Personally I think any dog that attacks like that shouldn't be allowed anywhere in public they are a danger to everyone.

TRPardoe

[QUOTE=CitySimon]

The question is this... Do we sue them?

QUOTE]

There is no question - sue their ass off.

Not only is it the American Way but the stupid inconsiderate bastards deserve it for keeping a known dangerous dog and allowing it out in public uncontrolled.

anotherlimey

You can't be serious?

evoal2003

So in your line of thinking an abused child that becomes a serial killer should be allowed to walk freely through society too.

User Name

As a general matter, a dog who bites and/or seriously injures a member of the public in a public place, such as a public footpath, will not be blamed for the attack. The owner will likely be held liable for the actions of his/her dog. If the owner was aware that his/her dog had a history of biting and/or injuring people, the dog may legally be regarded as a dangerous animal with regard to which the owner will be held strictly liable for all attacks and bites on members of the public in a public place. The law will not hold an animal liable, but will hold the dog owner liable.

An owner who argues that it's the previous owner's fault is not a legal defense and in fact equates with an admission that the current owner was on notice as to the tendency of his/her dog to attack people. In short, the current owner will likely be held strictly liable for all harm caused by his/her dog.

Apart from the tort/civil liability aspect of liability (which usually results in money damages awarded to the plaintiff), if the owner had actual knowledge that his/her dog had a history of biting and/or harming members of the public, this might well give rise to criminal charges against the dog owner which, if proven, might well result in a custodial sentence.

In short, if an owner has a dog that has a history of biting, the owner (regardless of previous owner's fault or neglect) has a current duty to protect the public and one way of doing that is to ensure the animal does not come into contact with the public or when in public is fitted with a muzzle.

Disclaimer: not legal advice, for general discussion purposes only, no warranties express or implied. If you desire legal advice, please go to your lawyer, but expressly not me.