Maybe it’s better sometimes not to stand on all your legal rights? “Jeffery Ely ran over a dog and then sued its owners for the cost of repairing his vehicle. Ely claims in court filings that he suffered $1,100 in damages after Fester, a brain-damaged miniature pinscher, ran in front of his 1997 Honda Civic in January.” (USA Today, May 7).
“Minn. driver kills dog, sues owners”
Maybe it’s better sometimes not to stand on all your legal rights? “Jeffery Ely ran over a dog and then sued its owners for the cost of repairing his vehicle. Ely claims in court filings that he suffered $1,100 in damages after Fester, a brain-damaged miniature pinscher, ran in front of his 1997 Honda Civic […]
10 Comments
I don’t see much of a problem with this. If the family’s car had rolled into the street and he had hit that, would this even be up here? No. It may be a little crass and tactless, but he has every right to collect damages.
Ha, I saw a similar case on The People’s Court a long time ago. This burly biker was suing a seven-year-old’s family because his dog ran into the street in front of his Harley… when he ran over the dog and killed it, it caused damages to his bike, for which he was suing. The poor little boy had to rehash the whole story of how his dog died, it was pretty pathetic…
I think I might have let it go were I the biker. That said, he had a good case: the dog wasn’t on a leash, so the owners really were at fault. Wapner ruled for the plaintiff, angering my grandmother (who was watching it with me), but correctly, I think.
I hope the damages to the car were from swerving in an attempt to avoid the dog, not from hitting a “miniature”… Anyhow, Ely is suing for $1,100. The dog’s owners are countersuing for $2,400. Anyone here expect either of the lawyers involved to come out with less than $10,000???
I don’t know Minn. law, and don’t have the time to research it, but if this were a NY case, then it would be a loser from the getgo. See Young v Wyman et al. 76 N.Y.2d 1009 (1990).(the mere presence of an unrestrained dog on the street does not give rise to a presumption of negligence on the part of its owner)
http://www.law.cornell.edu/nyctap/search/display.html?terms=dog%20car&url=/nyctap/I90_0231.htm
Minnie Driver killed a dog?
I found this case to be not abnormal. I had a friend who had to buy a Corvette after his dog was struck by the car on the highway and did considerable damage to the car. A homeowner is liable for damages caused by their pets.
Kim,
You have to wonder if having that seven year old tell about losing his dog was done by the producers of The People’s Court or if they were playing the sympathy card. A seven year old doesn’t own a dog, his parents or guardians do. The owner is responsible for the dog and any damages caused by the dog. The driver is well within his rights to sue. This article is just an attempt to get him to drop the suit.
This is hardly newsworthy. I failed to restrain my dog, she ran into to path of a car and was hit damaging the car. I was more concerned for my pet, who did recover, but the accident was my fault and my homeowners insured paid for the damage to the car.
I wonder how he suffered $1000+ in auto damage: Min Pins are roughly 10# and 10″ tall (and soft-bodied.) Your car would suffer more damage running over a concrete parking lot curb….
And here I thought a driver was generally held liable for damages to things struck with his car, whether those things are other cars, or children, or my mailbox.
Last I checked, if you are driving and you hit an illegally parked car you’re still going to be held liable for the collision.
I’ve seen extraordinary fines levied against people who hit goats or coyotes while driving on roads in our national parks…the theory is that the driver should be driving safe enough to stop if a creature should appear.
Is there some special “death to dogs” law that reverses liability if it’s a canine?