Driver sues owners of dog that struck his car

[MikeVic]

wtf. How do you know driving the speed limit gives enough time to stop when a dog darts onto the street.

A dog is a pet though. If a squirrel lost its footing and fell on your windshield, cracking it, you can't do anything about that. But a dog has a link to an owner.

[rkmsuf]

I gun it if I see cats in the road.

[wade moore]

I hate seeing this thread.... I have two Miniature Pinschers .

[BrianD]

Originally Posted by SnDvls

again if he was speeding he wouldn't have adequate time, but then if he was driving the speed limit he most likely would.

This is going to be an awfully tough assertion to support given the current information. Would going 36 in a 35 zone really make the difference between hitting the dog or not? Is it only speeding if you are going over the speed limit? Was the down running down the middle of the road or did it jump out from behind a parked car? Way too many variables to hang anything on speed.

[JonInMiddleGA]

Originally Posted by BrianD

Way too many variables to hang anything on speed.

This hits my response pretty well spot on*.

The most obvious problem is that speed has to be considered in relationship to the proximity to the car where the dog entered the roadway. If he's 100 yards down the street there's one speed where a safe stop could be made, if he steps into the path less than 10 feet away there's an entirely different distance.

*("spot" pun is unintentional)

[Schmidty]

Even though he has the right to sue, the guy is a steaming pile of shit for doing so.

I hope that anyone arguing his case has the same thing happen to them.

[JonInMiddleGA]

Originally Posted by Schmidty

I hope that anyone arguing his case has the same thing happen to them.

Have their car damaged because someone failed to exercise proper control over their dog? And then have to go to court to try to recover the expenses caused by that failure?

Seems like an odd thing to wish on people but ... okay.

[rkmsuf]

Originally Posted by JonInMiddleGA

Have their car damaged because someone failed to exercise proper control over their dog? And then have to go to court to try to recover the expenses caused by that failure?

Seems like an odd thing to wish on people but ... okay.

I'm all for it if you get some creative estimates. Possibly a little high...

[MikeVic]

Why the fuck does the driver have to pay for the damages (if this was a case where the driver wasn't speeding by a lot, and had time to stop)? The dog is the responsibility of the owner, not the driver.

[Schmidty]

Originally Posted by JonInMiddleGA

Have their car damaged because someone failed to exercise proper control over their dog? And then have to go to court to try to recover the expenses caused by that failure?

Seems like an odd thing to wish on people but ... okay.

Compassion and karma are the only things that matter in that situation as far as I'm concerned.


(And by the way, of course I wouldn't want someone's pet to be killed, no matter how big a douche the person is.)

[JonInMiddleGA]

Originally Posted by Schmidty

Compassion and karma are the only things that matter in that situation as far as I'm concerned.

I'm all for it.

Some compassion for the property owner who suffered a financial loss through no fault of their own and some karma for the cheap bastards who fucked up and not only got their dog killed but also tried to screw someone out of cash in the process.

[Schmidty]

Originally Posted by JonInMiddleGA

I'm all for it.

Some compassion for the property owner who suffered a financial loss through no fault of their own and some karma for the cheap bastards who fucked up and not only got their dog killed but also tried to screw someone out of cash in the process.

So you've never had a situation where for one second your pet or kid was out of your sight? You're that perfect?

If you were the dog owner, what would you do in this situation? Would you have offered money right away after your dog got killed, or would you wait until you got sued? If you had been sued, would you have just gone out with a wimper? I'm honesty curious about what you (and others) would have done in this situation.

[Huckleberry]

If my dog had just died then in no way would I have thought of offering to pay for the damages.

But if the driver at some point asked that I do so or came to me later asking that then I'm fairly confident that after some consideration I would pay for the damages.

In which case I would avoid court costs.

[rkmsuf]

Originally Posted by Huckleberry

If my dog had just died then in no way would I have thought of offering to pay for the damages.

But if the driver at some point asked that I do so or came to me later asking that then I'm fairly confident that after some consideration I would pay for the damages.

In which case I would avoid court costs.

winner

[MikeVic]

Originally Posted by Huckleberry

If my dog had just died then in no way would I have thought of offering to pay for the damages.

But if the driver at some point asked that I do so or came to me later asking that then I'm fairly confident that after some consideration I would pay for the damages.

In which case I would avoid court costs.

Yeah, I agree here. I wouldn't be in the state of mind to right away say "I'll pay for the repair costs." But if the driver approached me, I'd eventually agree to it.

I guess it's a bit different here, in that it would just be a deductible that the dog owner would pay... so $500 max if the driver is paying the least for insurance. And $100 minimum if the driver is paying for the most for insurance. If this was a kid, and it was the kid's fault, and the kid died... there's no way I'd ask to cover my deductible. I can spare that $200 without adding more to the parents' situation.

[Fidatelo]

Wait how big was the kid again?

[rkmsuf]

Originally Posted by Fidatelo

Wait how big was the kid again?

about the size of a pigman

[Daimyo]

Originally Posted by Schmidty

Compassion and karma are the only things that matter in that situation as far as I'm concerned.


(And by the way, of course I wouldn't want someone's pet to be killed, no matter how big a douche the person is.)

How far does that extend? What if the guy can't afford to fix his car, loses his job for lack of transportation, and ends up homeless? Does that then make it okay for him to ask for the money?

Neither party wanted this to happen, but the driver is completely innocent in this. Why should he be out $2000?

[JonInMiddleGA]

Originally Posted by Schmidty

So you've never had a situation where for one second your pet or kid was out of your sight? You're that perfect?

The absence of perfection does nothing to change bearing the responsibility. Nor do I imagine it would do much to relieve the guilt of the screw up. And more specifically to your question, I have never once in my entire life had a pet "escape" {knock on wood, hard & twice for certainty}, not even a couple who were very door curious. And no, not once ever, has my child gone out the door without my knowledge for any reason (likely because he knows full well that my reaction to him ever doing would be far more dangerous than anything outside). And no, until he reached a level where I was firmly convinced he knew better than to step into traffic for any reason whatsoever was he left unsupervised outside. Back in my reporter days I wrote too many stories than involved a child injury or fatality that included some take on the phrase "left unsupervised for just a moment", gives you a heightened awareness of the danger I guess. I'm not going to claim perfection as a parent or a pet parent, but damned if I don't work pretty hard at not screwing up something that's such a fundamental responsibility either.

If you were the dog owner, what would you do in this situation? Would you have offered money right away after your dog got killed, or would you wait until you got sued?

Yeah, I'm pretty sure I would have made the offer, as I would have been pretty darned sure I was legally responsible for the damages and damned sure I was ethically responsible for them (assuming the driver was operating normally; i.e. didn't drive through my yard to hit the dog). It isn't likely to be made until after the immediate situation is dealt with (checking the dog, emergency vet trip if needed, etc.) but sooner rather than later. With what I've seen about the situation, there's pretty much no chance in hell I would have waited around to get sued.

[DanGarion]

Originally Posted by GoldenEagle

$2400 for a dog? Wow.

I'd tell them to spend 60 bucks for the paperwork at a shelter, they are wasting money buying a dog for that much.


But I'm 100% behind the guy, these people have to be responsible for their property.

Dog runs out and gets hit and does damage is the same as if you forgot to set your parking break and your car rolled out into the street and hit someone.

[DanGarion]

Originally Posted by Fidatelo

Why should the parents be liable for their kid doing something he knows he shouldn't do? If he knows he shouldn't do it, shouldn't he be liable? I think if I was a parent and got sued because my 12 year old damaged some dudes front bumper when he darted into traffic I'd sue my kid for the amount that I'm being sued for, plus maybe some damages to my image and self-esteem.

You must be replying sarcastically here...

[DanGarion]

Originally Posted by SnDvls

again if he was speeding he wouldn't have adequate time, but then if he was driving the speed limit he most likely would.

What world do you live in? Does your neighborhood have no vehicles parked on the side of the street?

[Fidatelo]

Originally Posted by dangarion

You must be replying sarcastically here...

I never reply sarcastically.

[DanGarion]

Originally Posted by Schmidty

Even though he has the right to sue, the guy is a steaming pile of shit for doing so.

I hope that anyone arguing his case has the same thing happen to them.

So let's take this another way. The dog runs out into the road, and he is able to react by swerving out of the way of the dog, which in turn he crashes into another car and kills someone else. Who is responsible for this? (he was going the speed limit and abiding all driving laws).

[wade moore]

Originally Posted by dangarion

I'd tell them to spend 60 bucks for the paperwork at a shelter, they are wasting money buying a dog for that much.


But I'm 100% behind the guy, these people have to be responsible for their property.

Dog runs out and gets hit and does damage is the same as if you forgot to set your parking break and your car rolled out into the street and hit someone.

FWIW - Min Pins cost nowhere near $2400, I have no idea where this person is buying them. Even rip-off artists, puppy mill pet stores it's like $850 - local breeder it's closer to $400.

[SnDvls]

Originally Posted by dangarion

What world do you live in? Does your neighborhood have no vehicles parked on the side of the street?

nope against HOA regulations

[Eaglesfan27]

Originally Posted by Lathum

exactly.

I would be curious about the guys financial situation.

I'm late to the thread, but I'm guessing it isn't good by the choice of cars as well as the fact that he is working two jobs. This suit may be a financial necessity.

[Mota]

Originally Posted by MrBug708

The Munthes have filed a $2,400 countersuit against Ely for the cost to buy Fester, the time they had to take off work for court appearances, and the cost of buying a dog to replace Fester.

That's not fair, they're suing for 2 dogs!

[Cringer]

Originally Posted by SnDvls

nope against HOA regulations

Does that mean you can't have more then a few friends/family over at a time if they are coming over in their own cars?

[Noop]

A few of you I am afraid are off the reservation. I can not understand how some of you place more value in the life of an animal then a human. Sorry if the dog is dead but the guy is not a douche for asking for money. Through no fault of his own he incurred damages and since the dog is someone's property he has every right to demand his car be fixed. dangarion's example is pretty fair and I agree with him. What if the driver tried to avoid the dog and hurt a human being? Who is at fault?

[Fidatelo]

Why is no one suing the estate of the dog? Shouldn't the driver just get a food bowl, water dish, a few half-chewed rawhides, 3 tennis balls, and maybe a dog bed?

[JonInMiddleGA]

Originally Posted by Noop

What if the driver tried to avoid the dog and hurt a human being? Who is at fault?

Just off the top of my head, I think that probably goes on the driver, as he's responsible for safely operating the vehicle. Replace "somebody's dog" with "random squirrel" and see if you don't end up at the same place.

[Noop]

I am under the impression that normal people will not swerve for a squirrel.

[Ironhead]

I am huge on animal rights and just yesterday took a 7th cat into my household. All rescued, save one. From a cool and dispassionate glance I cannot fault the driver for seeking damages. I think the report intentionally gives some clues into the driver's financial status as it states the year, make and model of his car and also that he works 2 jobs. If you are working two jobs the last thing you need is any trouble with your car. If it were my dog I would be emotionally stung by the suit but hopefully could view and understand where the other person was coming from.

[Vince]

Speaking of kids getting hit by cars and damages...

When my little brother was about 13, he got hit by a car while riding his bike on the way to Football practice. He was in full pads, and the guy was making a right turn, going about 10 MPH in a small pickup truck. Ronnie flew a few feet and landed, but was pretty much ok. He put a sizable dent in the pickup's hood. Things got handled, people went on their way.

The pickup's owner called us about 3 days later asking us to pay for the repair on the hood of the truck. My dad told him he'd be happy to pay, if the guy came over in person so he could beat the shit out of him before he gave him the money. The guy never showed up.

[Vince]

Dola - in the interest of full disclosure, Ronnie was in the crosswalk when he was hit, the driver was completely at fault.

[Neon_Chaos]

Kids are not pets. Stop comparing them.

[Dekanth]

Strange to see this thread. I have a client who has a 2007 Mustang, some kind of limited edition, maybe a Shelby?? I'm not too good with makes and models of cars. He rarely drives it, just on some weekends, but weekend before last a dog jumps in front of it and he hits it going about 35. Totally fucked up the whole front end. Thousands of dollars of damage. The dog was OK, limping a bit, but seemed fine. My client is trying to get them to pay for the damages, but I don't think they have the money. His insurance company said he is covered, but subject to his deductible of $500. They laid out his 2 options. (1) get the guy to give you 500 bucks, therefore you are not out anything and your car gets fixed. (2) if he doesn't give you the 500, let the insurance company know and they will go after him for the full amount. I'm not sure where it stands right now.

Now, whether the dog was hurt, killed, or just fine, it really doesn't matter. This dog was off its leash, and in traffic. There was no way to avoid the collision. Why should my client be out anything? I am all for sueing, or doing whatever you can to make yourself whole again. My client could afford the 500 bucks no problem, but why should he have to??

[Dekanth]

Originally Posted by dangarion

So let's take this another way. The dog runs out into the road, and he is able to react by swerving out of the way of the dog, which in turn he crashes into another car and kills someone else. Who is responsible for this? (he was going the speed limit and abiding all driving laws).

The driver of the car.

Here is another weird insurance/legal situation somewhat related:

If you hit a deer, it is covered under comprehensive. Most reputable insurance companies will not raise your rates for comp claims. If you swerve to miss the deer and hit a tree or something, it is covered under collision and considered at fault. Up go your rates. Many auto policies have a 100 or 200 comp deductible and a 500 collision.

The moral of the story, it is financially better for you to hit the deer! Go figure.

[Horizon]

I wonder if the dog's damage would be covered under your home owners policy?

[Bad-example]

Originally Posted by Neon_Chaos

Kids are not pets. Stop comparing them.

But what if your kid ran out into the street and got hit by a dog?