# Dog bite accusation



## armauro (May 6, 2008)

On 12/29 evening two of my boys got loose and ran across street up to a person with a little dog- she screamed and picked it up and they tried to get it. I ran there and put them away when the very rich woman claimed they bit the face off her dog and she got bit on her buttocks.
Upon inspection the face of the little dog was fine and where she claimed she was bit there were no pants puncture.
I later walked down to her house and apologized again - she said she was not bit but it was the dogs paw on her buttocks. I thought all was fine.

Well she called the police and filed a dog bite case later that evening after admitting to me she was fine. Animal control called but said she was probably not bit and did not follow up. I gave a report to the police of my version.

Today a certified letter arrives from a law firm looking for insurance info for damages. 
This woman has made it her life's work now to watch if my guys are on lead in the development or not.

I believe my insurance company which I have ad for 12 years will probably cancel my insurance with my umbrella.


----------



## lazybones18 (Jun 16, 2009)

what a piece of **** woman ... our system allows things like this to happen.. people suing for no reason...


----------



## BARBIElovesSAILOR (Aug 11, 2014)

*Sorry*

I am sorry to hear about this. I hope that she is just bluffing and she really didn't get hurt and her dog is fine. I hope that she doesn't pursue this or drag you to court. I hope your dogs are okay too. This is unfortunate for everyone. Things like this happen though, all we can do as owners is make sure our dogs are secured at all times. Even then things can happen so I do feel for you. Please update us later on, on what ends up happening. Hopefully she realizes how much paperwork time, money, time lost it is going to be to pursue this legal matter and just drops it.


----------



## dmom (Jul 2, 2009)

Does she not have to prove a bite, like medical report, pictures police report? I would think that the insurance company would require some kind of proof.


----------



## Jax08 (Feb 13, 2009)

This is why she's rich. And why laws are passed like the NYS no fault law that totally screws ppl like me that get hurt and can't get medical bills paid.


----------



## Gwenhwyfair (Jul 27, 2010)

Usually when it goes to court, she will have to provide evidence to make a case before a judge. In the meantime she can make claims and intimidate with letters from attorneys.





dmom said:


> Does she not have to prove a bite, like medical report, pictures police report? I would think that the insurance company would require some kind of proof.


----------



## Gwenhwyfair (Jul 27, 2010)

Btw...Armauro, didn't you have an incident in a dog park in CT last summer?


----------



## selzer (May 7, 2005)

This wouldn't be happening if your dogs did not scare the crap out of the woman, who was walking her dog. Sorry, but the fault here does lie with your management of your dogs. 

Who wants to see a pair of GSD rushing over to attack your dog? You own formidable dogs. You can't afford to let them run amok. Because you know what they will do. So you have to be double careful. 

That this woman is very rich has nothing to do with your lack of management. A very poor woman should not have your dogs attacking her dog either. 

If my dogs did this, I would be mortified. And yes, you might lose your insurance over this, and you might find it darn near impossible to get insured while you own these dogs. Because insurance companies often will settle out of court, this woman might not need to provide any proof of being bitten. 

The thing is, you failed your dogs here. I know that is a hard-nosed take on this. But people reading this thread have to know that they are responsible for their dog's actions. And GSDs aren't going to get a pass 99 times out of 100. If we allow our dogs to get loose, dogs that are likely to go after another dog, then we are facing losing those dogs, because most of us need to have insurance. 

I hope that my worst-case scenario does not happen for you. I hope you can find another insurance company. But dog owners need to understand that these kinds of incidents makes it hard for ALL of us. Insurance companies do not want to insure us because people let their formidable dogs get loose, and cause issues. And then those people blame the person for walking their dog down the street, and making a mountain out of mole hill.


----------



## Augustine (Nov 22, 2014)

selzer said:


> This wouldn't be happening if your dogs did not scare the crap out of the woman, who was walking her dog. Sorry, but the fault here does lie with your management of your dogs.
> 
> Who wants to see a pair of GSD rushing over to attack your dog? You own formidable dogs. You can't afford to let them run amok. Because you know what they will do. So you have to be double careful.
> 
> ...


I agree, but you can't lie all the fault of the outcome on the owner. Should they have kept better track of their dogs? Absolutely. But is the woman a melodramatic, money-hungry idiot? Most definitely.

The owner may be in the wrong, but nothing bad happened and the woman in question is blowing this wayy out of proportion. And suing someone over a situation in which nobody got hurt, especially after the owner apologized and owned up to their mistake? That's just ludicrous. 

Telling the owner they messed up and that they need to do everything they can to prevent someone more serious from happening is completely understandable and also very important advice. But sorry, the woman suing is a complete and utter idiot and does not deserve to be treated like a "victim". It's a mockery to all the real victims out there who were actually hurt due to unprovoked animal attacks.


----------



## selzer (May 7, 2005)

Augustine said:


> I agree, but you can't lie all the fault of the outcome on the owner. Should they have kept better track of their dogs? Absolutely. But is the woman a melodramatic, money-hungry idiot? Most definitely.
> 
> The owner may be in the wrong, but nothing bad happened and the woman in question is blowing this wayy out of proportion. And suing someone over a situation in which nobody got hurt, especially after the owner apologized and owned up to their mistake? That's just ludicrous.
> 
> Telling the owner they messed up and that they need to do everything they can to prevent someone more serious from happening is completely understandable and also very important advice. But sorry, the woman suing is a complete and utter idiot and does not deserve to be treated like a "victim". It's a mockery to all the real victims out there who were actually hurt due to unprovoked animal attacks.


Maybe. But we are looking at it from the owner's POV, and we are only hearing one side of the story.

When we are out on a walk and some dog or dogs comes rushing out, and tries to attack our dog, then we come on here and list out the details, what is the advice? 

Is it, "Just be glad no one got hurt." No, it is call Animal Control. Call the police. Call their landlord. And so on and so forth. 

The OP says, "Now this woman is making it her life's work making sure my dogs are on leash in the development." That SCREAMS that the guy is not taking this seriously. 

I am sorry. From the "very rich" to this statement, this post just got under my craw. This lady got rushed by TWO male GSDs. It is only an accident that she and her dog were not seriously injured. She is probably on her little dog forum talking about this jerk who lets his adult GSDs run around loose, and they charged her and her dog. They probably suggested she call the police, animal control, document when the dog is off lead, consult a lawyer, etc. 

I don't know the full story, but I would be ticked if two huge formidable dogs rushed at me and one of mine like that. And if the dogs have a history of being loose, or if the guy lets them loose again -- yeah, maybe I would be doing more than just calling the police.


----------



## Liesje (Mar 4, 2007)

Getting scared by two dogs doesn't mean you get to sue someone and take their money. Not defending the OP here, but good grief isn't our society litigious enough? If I were the OP I'd go to court and present my case. Just because she filed suit doesn't mean she's automatically won.


----------



## selzer (May 7, 2005)

Liesje said:


> Getting scared by two dogs doesn't mean you get to sue someone and take their money. Not defending the OP here, but good grief isn't our society litigious enough? If I were the OP I'd go to court and present my case. Just because she filed suit doesn't mean she's automatically won.


Some of us, maybe most of us, cannot afford even an accusation of a dog bite. If the HOI wants to settle, he won't have a choice to present his case. People have to cut with the excuses, and how rotten the other person is, and get their darn dogs under control. This is embarrassing.


----------



## ksotto333 (Aug 3, 2011)

selzer said:


> Maybe. But we are looking at it from the owner's POV, and we are only hearing one side of the story.
> 
> When we are out on a walk and some dog or dogs comes rushing out, and tries to attack our dog, then we come on here and list out the details, what is the advice?
> 
> ...


This is exactly what I was thinking...and what if her dog is now afraid of other dogs because of this situation? People on this forum are often complaining about their dogs reaction after being chased or attacked by other dogs. Taking it to court may be excessive, but I would certainly make sure those dogs are always leashed.


----------



## Stevenzachsmom (Mar 3, 2008)

ksotto333 said:


> This is exactly what I was thinking...and what if her dog is now afraid of other dogs because of this situation? People on this forum are often complaining about their dogs reaction after being chased or attacked by other dogs. Taking it to court may be excessive, but I would certainly make sure those dogs are always leashed.


I agree wholeheartedly with this. I was walking my leashed 30 pound beagle mix and my 4 month old GSD puppy. A guy was playing fetch with his off leash full grown Lab. The lab saw my two dogs, completely ignored his owner and bulldozed into my much smaller dogs. My dogs were yelping and screaming. He stood there like a fool calling the dog. Meanwhile, my husband grabbed the lab by the collar and said, "Get your dog on a leash!" I was seriously PO'd.

By not controlling his dogs, the OP is putting his dogs lives in danger. This is not the first problem he has had with his dogs. I put the blame squarely on his shoulders. http://www.germanshepherds.com/forum/general-information/476538-dog-park-disaster-beware.html


----------



## llombardo (Dec 11, 2011)

I can see and understand both points. There are two sides to every story. I do know that some good points have been brought up. Lots of GSD owners on this very site claim they would hit, kick or even shoot a dog to protect their big GSD. What do people think that this woman should have done?


----------



## Waffle Iron (Apr 3, 2012)

*While I am not a lawyer, only a second year law student, I cannot provide you legal advice. *

What I can do is tell you _*that you need a lawyer*_, now, to review this case. Civil litigation (i.e., a lawsuit) is knocking at your door, and you need someone with expertise in the law to handle it so you can be defended. However, from an academic point of view, a negligence action by the alleged victim to recover damages from you will have to demonstrate, in pertinent part, that there was an injury that was proximately caused by your dogs. In the case of a dog bite, evidence would have to be introduced demonstrating a bite linked to your dogs in order to prevail on any claim. There are other factors of course, but your lawyer can review those with you as well as discuss the weight of any evidence this supposed victim plans to introduce.


----------



## armauro (May 6, 2008)

Obviously I take fault for this instance and apologized twice- it was dark and my dogs were on my property in the driveway before I got a chance to leash them. They are not dog aggressive and are very social- irrelevant here except they would not bite anyone.
I reviewed the case- the police complaint was not filed until 24 hours later and she refused medical attention. Animal control called 2 days after the incident but had no interest in the case- actually they did not believe it.
No one asked for a rabies certificate and no dog was quarantined. Rather bizarre! I do not know if there is proof of a bite- but looked closely with my flashlight and there was no evidence on her or her dog. She admitted to me that she was not bit but it was his paw.
A month after the fact a lawsuit comes. In Florida every third ad on TV is for ambulance chasing lawyers.


----------



## armauro (May 6, 2008)

As far as comments on my off leash dog park case- my submissive female was attacked for no reason when my pack leader when after the other dog when the owner reached in to separate the dogs- could have been bit by his own dog. We just won that case in court in Connecticut.
IMO all dog parks are accidents waiting to happen.


----------



## JoanMcM (Dec 5, 2013)

is it only in the US that so much time and money spent on the incidents?

OP, think of it this way...in many areas, if your dogs went off your property and attacked another person's property (their animals) they could legally take out a gun and shoot your dogs. If you cannot safely control your animals, then you are endangering your own animals more then anything.

Everyone has a slip sometime in their lives. And this is the time of over responses, but you as an owner are ultimately responsible.


----------



## scarfish (Apr 9, 2013)

i would've refused to sign for the certified letter.


----------



## JakodaCD OA (May 14, 2000)

I can also see it from both sides, if this were me, and I had a couple of BIG dogs charging up to me especially at nite, I woulda pooped my pants  

Now, if they really did some damage (other than the scare factor), yeah I would be quite PO'd and would expect medical compensation (if the dog or I needed a vet/dr).

Since this hasn't occured, well poop happens and none of us are perfect in managing our dogs at times, it wasn't done on purpose, no physical damage, to "sue" is ridiculous. 

I think the OP has said he's apologized profusely, no one in authority seems to think it's a big deal, the lady refused medical , said it was a "paw", her dog wasn't harmed.

People are way to sue happy over the most ridiculous things and for what? To get a few bucks and tie up the court system?


----------



## Debanneball (Aug 28, 2014)

JakodaCD OA said:


> I can also see it from both sides, if this were me, and I had a couple of BIG dogs charging up to me especially at nite, I woulda pooped my pants
> 
> Now, if they really did some damage (other than the scare factor), yeah I would be quite PO'd and would expect medical compensation (if the dog or I needed a vet/dr).
> 
> ...


This makes the most sense. Doesn't she need proof, i.e., take her dog to the vet immediately, the vet makes a report also, something? If not, boy, we had all better watch out.. Can you imagine what would happen if anyone could sue for anything whatsoever without proof...


----------



## armauro (May 6, 2008)

The irony of all this is when I walked to her house to apologize the second time all was cool. She was not hurt neither was her little dog. She spoke to me in a calm way and asked to keep them on leash. If one is bit by a gsd there is some serious injury.

In my development this is getting blown out of proportion in so many ways. There is not a single police or animal control nuisance report on any of my dogs since 2008 but if you were to listen to these people I had wild dogs roaming the neighborhood.

It is the breed that generates such negative feedback.


----------



## scarfish (Apr 9, 2013)

JakodaCD OA said:


> People are way to sue happy over the most ridiculous things and for what? To get a few bucks and tie up the court system?


i doubt they are actually going to go through court system. they are hoping you don't have insurance 'cause they know your insurance is going to want all the medical records and there is none. 

they are looking for a response from OP like "i'm sorry how much can i write a check for to stay out of court". i wouldn't respond or take any action right now. if you get a subpoena then get a lawyer. it's prolly a bluff and if not you will have time to get a lawyer later. if you're in my boat, i have legal insurance paid by my job. i would see a lawyer right now if it's free. if not than wait.


----------



## llombardo (Dec 11, 2011)

I would go back to animal control/police and get something from them stating that no report was made and medical refused.


----------



## wolfstraum (May 2, 2003)

Dogs, even on your own property, should be contained. They step off your property, you are liable. 

Years ago, a guy in the street, with a pit bull puppy was taunting my male in my yard - I came out, told him to move away from my house...he responded to me by saying he was not in my yard but on the street and I had no right to tell him to leave...the dogs collar broke - fursaver - he ran into the street - DID NOT TOUCH the dog - spit on the dog as he barely got near him and came back. I examined the dog - NOT A MARK on him. He called animal control and reported me. AC came, examined paperwork on the dog....and asked me for $75 to pay his vet bill to "stitch up" the hurt pit bull. I refused, saying the pit bull was not hurt. I said I wanted to see bill and vet records....which were not available - it was a scam. He filed small claims court charges (cost him $55). I got hit with both the suite from the owner and AC for my dog being in the street. Guy does not show up for his own hearing for the vet bill. For the AC, guy shows up with a bunch of friends who start to testify how they walk by my house, and dog barks at them....DUH!!!! Dog IN HIS OWN YARD barks at people walking dogs up the street! Judge former K9 LEO.....tells them if they did not SEE this incident basically to sit down and shut up. Asks the guy for the vet bill - he does not have one...so no proof my dog hurt his...then tells the guy he has no right to complain about the vet bill - since he did not show up for hearing. I get fined $50 for my dog leaving my property because I admitted that he did. Nothing else. No proof of damages to implicate the dog as being dangerous.

OK PA not FL - not rich people - but same mentality. Having money does not make people smarter or more moral.....maybe the opposite. No proof. One persons word against anothers. My HOI was not involved at all.

If you can't fence your yard, leash or do underground and do not leave dogs out unsupervised. 

Lee


----------



## armauro (May 6, 2008)

I already have sent facts/reports on case to a friend who is one of the best litigation lawyer in the county. I will fight this without insurance co involvement on my own dime out of principle.


----------



## Gwenhwyfair (Jul 27, 2010)

In bold below -

Same as CT? 

You live in the same development as the 'rich' lady, so you probably have a few coins in your pocket too.

While you did take responsibility in the CT dog park incident and you apologized for this incident too, you blamed the state of Ct and the laws and people there as well. Me thinks these things happen to you for a reason. You aren't careful enough and while owning up to a certain extent there appears to be a pattern here. 

I'm in agreement with Sue and Lee.

I'm glad you can afford a very good attorney and I really hope that this doesn't happen again, for the sake of your dogs too....






armauro said:


> Obviously I take fault for this instance and apologized twice- it was dark and my dogs were on my property in the driveway before I got a chance to leash them. They are not dog aggressive and are very social- irrelevant here except they would not bite anyone.
> I reviewed the case- the police complaint was not filed until 24 hours later and she refused medical attention. Animal control called 2 days after the incident but had no interest in the case- actually they did not believe it.
> No one asked for a rabies certificate and no dog was quarantined. Rather bizarre! I do not know if there is proof of a bite- but looked closely with my flashlight and there was no evidence on her or her dog. She admitted to me that she was not bit but it was his paw.
> A month after the fact a lawsuit comes.* In Florida every third ad on TV is for ambulance chasing lawyers*.


----------



## SuperG (May 11, 2013)

selzer said:


> She is probably on her little dog forum talking about this jerk who lets his adult GSDs run around loose, and they charged her and her dog. They probably suggested she call the police, animal control, document when the dog is off lead, consult a lawyer, etc.



True true


SuperG


----------



## martemchik (Nov 23, 2010)

So a few things about this forum:

A) We love agreeing with everything the OP says, only believing the OP's facts, and not really thinking that there is another side to the story. Remember, most people tell stories to show themselves in the best light possible.

B) The GSD is always right. I've seen this countless times. The GSD can do no wrong. But if another dog does the same thing...kill it!!!

In regards to the legal proceedings...you can sue basically anyone for anything. It doesn't mean you'll win. More than likely, if you try to hire a layer without proper proof/documentation they're unlikely to take the case. Their time is worth a lot of money, and they don't need to be going to court for a case they know they'll more than likely lose, and then try to collect the legal fees from an angry client. Most layers would probably pass on a case like this. Do you know why the justice department wins like 95%+ of the cases they take to court? It's because by the time they decide to press charges, they basically know they have a bullet proof case and there's no doubt that they'll win. The cases where there is any question as to what might happen, they don't bother taking to court. It's the same with private lawyers. It's just not worth their time.

This woman more than likely didn't get as rich as OP claims she is by suing people. That happens really rarely and you really need to get lucky with a situation/lawsuit in order to really get a nice payout that might actually make a difference in your life. You also don't get rich by suing individuals. Individuals generally don't have the kind of money that will garner a huge settlement. When you see those commercials for "ambulance chasers" they're usually suing big corporations after one of their employees was negligent in some way. If you sue a "middle/upper class" individual and get a judgment of some sort, it's likely to be slowly garnished as a percentage of their wages for the rest of their life. And you might see an extra $100 a month...if that. Kind of tough to get super rich off those types of lawsuits...

Our legal system actually works pretty well contrary to most people's beliefs. The #1 thing people usually lose is time, which can be costly, but it's generally not as corrupt as people like to believe. Also, as always, awesome how quickly people jump to conclusions after hearing just one side of the story. I'm sure most of you would make excellent jurors.


----------



## Gwenhwyfair (Jul 27, 2010)

Agree with a lot of what you wrote Max, but I don't think the folks on this forum are as consistently on the same page as you imply...


----------



## BeefedUpGSDs (Jan 24, 2015)

Interesting read. Over here in Australia, dogs aren't always on a lead and an incident like yours can happen very easily BUT no one takes legal action over this kind of thing.... Unless the person is mauled by the dog and if that happens they require hospital/doctor reports and photographic evidence as it means that the dog will most likely be euthanized.


----------



## wolfstraum (May 2, 2003)

I can understand both sides as well. Unfortunately, the biggest issue when there is a lawsuit involving dogs is not a money payout, but the court can order destroying the dog/s. I understand why Richard would defend himself, and the fact that both parties are "rich" (at least by comparison to most of us here, myself for sure) is not relevant to the fact that he must protect his dogs lives - whether he is in the "right" or not. The fact is that the dogs were NOT under control and left his property - and I too would have been upset had a big dog come rushing my puppy...and probably would want some assurances - physically - not verbally - that this would NOT be able to happen again. Unfortunately for Richard, she has chosen to do this via the legal system rather than approaching him and asking for some physical action to be initiated so that she can have that assurance. It is not relevant that the dogs are social. They scared the woman. Her lying is a negative, and will come out in testimony or deposition as she has no proof...but there is still a risk to the dogs as a result, and I totally understand Richard getting his own lawyer - which is probably NOT a particular hardship for him either.

Lee


----------



## pets4life (Feb 22, 2011)

can u get some witness?


WHen i was walking my dog yesterday a lady walking a small dog that was terrified told me a 12 year old boy walking a shepherd could not control his dog and attacked her dog so she called the police also on them.


----------



## pets4life (Feb 22, 2011)

llombrado makes a good point a lot of people ready to kill dogs for their 80 pound gsd who have a stronger bite force than a pit bull. 

Now think of a 10-20 pound dog how easily that can be killed by such a dog? Just takes one bite.

Actually after doing a bit of research working line german sheps have a harder bite force than any breed even rotts??? I am shocked to read that...


----------



## martemchik (Nov 23, 2010)

Gwenhwyfair said:


> Agree with a lot of what you wrote Max, but I don't think the folks on this forum are as consistently on the same page as you imply...


Meh...I've seen it way too many times.

Remember that guy that shot the GSD that went after him and his dogs in Oregon or something. People started searching the web for articles saying how friendly the GSD was, how it would've never hurt the dogs, how it didn't deserve to die. Yet when we get a thread about "stray dog ran out of neighbor's yard and went after my dog" the responses are always...kick the thing, spray it with bear spray, if you have a gun, don't be afraid to empty the clip into it, ect.

There was another thread probably a year or two ago about a neighbor's Chihuahua entering an unfenced yard, a GSD chasing the dog off the yard and following it back to its own house and then killing the dog on that property. Everyone praised the GSD for defending it's territory and chasing the dog off, no one really cared that the GSD went down the block and killed another dog and that the GSD was also loose in it's own yard and could've randomly attacked another dog that was just walking on the sidewalk as well.

We usually get one or two people that see the situation for what it is (not unlike what Sue did in this thread) but in general, the majority doesn't think the GSD can do anything wrong.


----------



## Ace GSD (May 30, 2014)

I believe that OP told us the true story i also believe the lady with the small dog was really terrified. My 10.5 months old is only 70 lbs but he is 27.5' tall . I always gonna see him like the 10 weeks puppy when i got him . Other people tho...not so much . My sister who have not met Ace for 2 months was pretty cautious even tho he was acting so sweet ear down and wagging tail and body . Other people dont see you dogs like you do . When Ace was 6 months old some people we came across on the street actually scared of him even tho they have dogs too ( small dogs ).
I hope this make sense for you guys  pardon the grammar.


----------



## Gwenhwyfair (Jul 27, 2010)

Hi, welcome to the forum.

For the most part it's the same in the U.S. 

Maybe the difference is here you can file a small claims law suit without evidence prior. If the dog did not actually cause injury there may just be some fines for the dog not being under control. Without evidence of injury it won't go much further then that....unless it's a really wacky judge.




BeefedUpGSDs said:


> Interesting read. Over here in Australia, dogs aren't always on a lead and an incident like yours can happen very easily BUT no one takes legal action over this kind of thing.... Unless the person is mauled by the dog and if that happens they require hospital/doctor reports and photographic evidence as it means that the dog will most likely be euthanized.


----------



## ksotto333 (Aug 3, 2011)

*"It was dark and my dogs were on my property in the driveway before I got a chance to leash them. They are not dog aggressive and are very social- irrelevant here except they would not bite anyone."
*Yet in the original post he said the dogs raced down toward the woman who picked up her dog, and they went after it.
I can't imagine this happening to me with my Yorkie, *especially in the dark*. On second thought my anger would be much greater than I originally thought. I know the power of my two, when they are happy to see me, what if they were after someone holding a small dog. He's lucky she didn't have a heart attack.
He obviously doesn't have proper control of his dogs, and needs to remedy that immediately, and prove it to the neighborhood.


----------



## ksotto333 (Aug 3, 2011)

*On 12/29 evening two of my boys got loose and ran across street up to a person with a little dog- she screamed and picked it up and they tried to get it.


*


----------



## Gwenhwyfair (Jul 27, 2010)

If I were in his shoes I would do the same. I would also redouble _my_ efforts to never let this happen again, no matter where I lived....

Btw- if the dogs have not actually bitten I don't think the dogs could be destroyed?



wolfstraum said:


> I can understand both sides as well. Unfortunately, the biggest issue when there is a lawsuit involving dogs is not a money payout, but the court can order destroying the dog/s. I understand why Richard would defend himself, and the fact that both parties are "rich" (at least by comparison to most of us here, myself for sure) is not relevant to the fact that he must protect his dogs lives - whether he is in the "right" or not. The fact is that the dogs were NOT under control and left his property - and I too would have been upset had a big dog come rushing my puppy...and probably would want some assurances - physically - not verbally - that this would NOT be able to happen again. Unfortunately for Richard, she has chosen to do this via the legal system rather than approaching him and asking for some physical action to be initiated so that she can have that assurance. It is not relevant that the dogs are social. They scared the woman. Her lying is a negative, and will come out in testimony or deposition as she has no proof...but there is still a risk to the dogs as a result, and I totally understand Richard getting his own lawyer - which is probably NOT a particular hardship for him either.
> 
> Lee


----------



## armauro (May 6, 2008)

For the record again as I was there- she was not bit and admitted to me verbally she was not bit. Interestingly, animal control was never involved as they are in all bite cases even 4 weeks after the incident. A rabies certificate was never called for and quite frankly she did not know what dog supposedly bit her.

I find it all rather bizarre- also she is rich because she is married to a DuPont.


----------



## Gwenhwyfair (Jul 27, 2010)

Sounds like bluster and bluffing then. 

Time to get that recall or emergency down, down pat.


----------



## RunShepherdRun (Oct 5, 2009)

armauro said:


> - it was dark and my dogs were on my property in the driveway before I got a chance to leash them. ...
> A month after the fact a lawsuit comes.


You had a chance to leash them – before you let them out into an unfenced yard. If the dogs will go off your property and charge others you must leash them before you let them out. Or securely fence your yard. 

Do you continue to let them out unleashed into your unfenced yard?
Have you let the dogs loose in the development since the incident?


----------



## Jax08 (Feb 13, 2009)

I can never figure out why a person who is being sued will come online and post things like "my dogs were off leash" "at the dog park incident..."

The more you talk, the more anyone can see this is your fault. Is the person suing over nothing? Perhaps. But you opened the door for that to happen.


----------



## Lilie (Feb 3, 2010)

Jax08 said:


> I can never figure out why a person who is being sued will come online and post things like "my dogs were off leash" "at the dog park incident..."
> 
> The more you talk, the more anyone can see this is your fault. Is the person suing over nothing? Perhaps. But you opened the door for that to happen.


Exactly what I was thinking. This thread has Columbo written all over it.


----------



## SuperG (May 11, 2013)

armauro said:


> For the record again as I was there- she was not bit and admitted to me verbally she was not bit.


Haven't read all the replies....but...just because she or her dog wasn't bit doesn't mean she can't go after you legally in a court of law. Too many are sue happy and concoct reasons such as emotional distress, trauma and a bunch of other baloney at times... The upside is; generally for a court to find someone guilty of inflicting emotional distress upon another ( without any physical harm involved ) the action has to be intentional and the behavior associated with this intentional act needs to shown as acute and beyond normal civil conduct.

However, as you have suggested, this individual has loads of money and perhaps access to a building full of attorneys...they can do as they please, not with the intention to win any monetary awards but maybe just to wield the "power" they have access to....

The onus is on the owner obviously and it is a good thing this didn't end up worse than described...if all is as you have detailed...I'd be surprised if anything comes of this, excepting the documentation of your dogs being loose.


SuperG


----------



## Hineni7 (Nov 8, 2014)

Couple of thoughts..... 

Should the OP have had control over his dogs, absolutely... 

Did he take responsibility for the actions of his dogs, absolutely... 

Does everyone at every moment have control over their own dogs? Be honest people! Definitely not! Yes, we should most definitely, but reality is they are dogs and can be unpredictable... The very best well trained dog can do things out of the ordinary. Read the posts on this board! It happens... 

So while I agree with the responses of the OP being solely responsible for his dogs, I think beating him over the head with it gets a bit old. Perhaps the time 'your' dog was not under control nothing happened (which is good), but it doesn't negate the fact that the dog was not under control  

I've been charged by small and big dogs alike (bitten by the small dog, and bowled over by big dogs).. Piss me off? Yes! Scare me? Yes! Sur? NO!!! The particular situations I've been in (years separate), the owners have been profusely apologetic, offering to pay any medical bills, and sufficiently chagrined. I understood and let it be... First they had shrugged it off or not cared then things would have been different as another accident would be just around the corner... 

I'm just saying, if we do a reality check, we will see that it does take an enormous amount of commitment to keep our dogs (well trained or not) under control all the time, and that minor incidents of lack of control or no less under control then this incident... Just a thought


----------



## KathrynApril (Oct 3, 2013)

When I read this thread and hear how if it was the other way around we would be saying call the police, protect the dog, etc. I don't think people on this forums would of felt the lady would have been in the wrong if she did that. It's more so about how things were handled after the incident.

When someone right away gets an attorney even though the other party has made apologies and seems to be having open communications to me that is a big red flag as a suit happy person. Most attorneys I have come across in my job will take lousy cases and try to get something, but then if they have to file suit THAT's when they drop the case. Grant it there are some who just won't touch any bad case with a ten foot pole, but that's definitely not the majority of the files I handle. 

I am not an attorney or anything so this is just personal experience. What I am trying to convey is just because this lady has an attorney doesn't reflect that she has a good case. Especially so if said attorney is a friend/relative of hers as I see that a lot too. 

I've had a neighbors' dogs knock me off my bike, causing me to fall on my dog and scrape my leg. They were apologetic. I didn't go and get an attorney nor did I expect them to pay for anything. It was an accident and a one time incident. 

If there was more involvement from AC I would be more like what is the OP not telling us, but from everything the OP says it seems that this lady who was frightened is just being a little over reactive. And true it could be that we are not hearing everything, but from what I have heard it sounds like the lady is suit-happy.

Good luck to you OP.


----------



## KathrynApril (Oct 3, 2013)

To clarify, I don't find the lady over reactive in calling the police or animal control. What I do find her over reactive in is getting an attorney.


----------



## Ace GSD (May 30, 2014)

Why are people like that rich lady and her small dog feel so violated when something like this happen ? Although no harm done ? I have had so many chihuahuas, yorkies, teacup poodles and other small dogs lunge and bark crazy at my puppy even since he was 10 weeks old . A maltese actually bit Ace when he was 5 months old and did not apologize . She actually smile and just ask her dog why was he so mean.


----------



## LoveEcho (Mar 4, 2011)

Who gives a crap that she's married to a DuPont? Why is this relevant?


----------



## middleofnowhere (Dec 20, 2000)

Practiaclly, if they grab a lawyer and you have insurance, your insurance co. will likely negotiate a settlement. Unfortunately, it is likely there will still be ramifications for you (op) and your dog. They will probably do this whether they find the OP at fault or not. They will likely do it because it is cheaper to settle than to tie up attornies in a law suit.

Just my take on it.


----------



## Lilie (Feb 3, 2010)

LoveEcho said:


> Who gives a crap that she's married to a DuPont? Why is this relevant?


Because sadly, we're not.


----------



## Steve Strom (Oct 26, 2013)

Lilie said:


> Because sadly, we're not.


And then again,,,,,,

John Eleuthère du Pont - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


----------



## llombardo (Dec 11, 2011)

Or this...no thank you

Du Pont heir accused of raping 2nd child in lawsuit


----------



## LoveEcho (Mar 4, 2011)

Mo money, mo problems.


----------



## selzer (May 7, 2005)

Hineni7 said:


> Couple of thoughts.....
> 
> Should the OP have had control over his dogs, absolutely...
> 
> ...


Sometimes saying you're sorry isn't enough. Sometimes you have to say you are sorry, and you are getting the yard fenced, and taking the dogs to more training, and not just say it, you need to ante up and do it.

Anyone can have a lax moment. True, but what happened in 2008? What about the dog park incident? This fellow is giving GSDs a terrible rep, and it isn't like it is all that good as it was. When a dog bites someone, I am usually one of the few who isn't that sorry to see someone put the dog down, depending on the situation of course. Because that dog already screwed up the GSD bite-numbers, why should one dog be having multiple bite incidents. Well, here we have an owner with multiple dog-incidents. 

Being responsible for your dog does not mean apologizing every time they get themselves in trouble. You have to manage your dogs so they do not get themselves into trouble. 

Some of us do release our dogs from the house and let them run to the car, or release them from the car and let them go to the house. We need to be pretty certain that we can recall them and that they aren't going to go after anyone if we do that. If we have a dog that will charge out the door and go after people, we need to leash the dog before we answer or open the door. If we have a dog that is going to go after dogs or people, we have to be that much more careful. But the fact is, we own BIG dogs. BIG dogs with pointy ears and HUGE teeth. Our dogs can hurt people by just running toward them. If someone sees to BIG dogs running toward them, and they react and fall or otherwise injure themselves, whose fault is it? Really? 

We choose to own large, formidable dogs. We want to continue to be allowed to own these dogs. The constitution protects the right to own guns, and even that is challenged over and again. But there is NO provision in the constitution for owning dogs. If dog owners are terribly irresponsible, local legislatures and flat out ban dogs over 40 pounds. They do not have to grandfather in existing dogs. If you have plenty of money you can move or fight it. If you don't, you are screwed. I personally could not move if my township trustees decided to ban my breed or dogs over a certain size. 

So, having people being irresponsible with their dogs regularly makes me very nervous. There are a LOT of dog owners out there, and our numbers are one thing we have in our favor. But they can make dog ownership much more difficult for us if we fail to manage dogs properly. And public safety is one of the few things government should be about. 

Individual owners have to get better about managing their dogs. And GSD fanciers need to be tougher on those of their number who are failing in this.


----------



## Hineni7 (Nov 8, 2014)

I wasn't on the board in 2008 so I have no idea behind the circumstances of that incident other than briefly stated part about somebody else's dog attacking his dog and they got bit trying to break up the fight - if that is the situation (and I don't know about it other than what was briefly posted a few posts ago), then that does not count. Breaking up dog fights is always tricky even when you know how to do it safely. 

I'm not giving the OP a blanket pass. And I do agree that sometimes an apology is not enough. I also understand that every strike is against our beloved breed... What I am saying is that people are very quick to throw stones blindly ignoring the fact that they are doing identical things but have dodged any repercussions.. Yes, it could be outstanding training, but we all know that training does not mean perfection. Things happen fast and sometimes without any warning and in am unprecedented way for the dog (I don't know the OP'S dogs or his past so if this is common for him than it is a mute point). If people are honest with themselves they will be able to count the close calls that could have been bad if things had just gone slightly different. Hopefully the lesson is learned and not repeated, but if this is/was the first time of something like this happening, the person is looking for a little support (this lady was not hurt, nor was her dog, an apology was made - twice, a month later s lawsuit? Come on...). Yes, a slap on the wrist, or if needed advice and reasoning as to where they went wrong (we are talking about first offenses not repeat consistent occurrences). Instead, a bunch of higher than thou comments were consistently being made and it irked me, to be completely honest. Read the posts... People on this board, even very knowledgeable and capable people are not perfect... To get slammed for it repeatedly isn't right. 

Now, since he has been on the board since 2008 and this could be a consistent happening that I don't know about, then my message can be disregarded


----------



## selzer (May 7, 2005)

Hineni7 said:


> I wasn't on the board in 2008 so I have no idea behind the circumstances of that incident other than briefly stated part about somebody else's dog attacking his dog and they got bit trying to break up the fight - if that is the situation (and I don't know about it other than what was briefly posted a few posts ago), then that does not count. Breaking up dog fights is always tricky even when you know how to do it safely.
> 
> I'm not giving the OP a blanket pass. And I do agree that sometimes an apology is not enough. I also understand that every strike is against our beloved breed... What I am saying is that people are very quick to throw stones blindly ignoring the fact that they are doing identical things but have dodged any repercussions.. Yes, it could be outstanding training, but we all know that training does not mean perfection. Things happen fast and sometimes without any warning and in am unprecedented way for the dog (I don't know the OP'S dogs or his past so if this is common for him than it is a mute point). If people are honest with themselves they will be able to count the close calls that could have been bad if things had just gone slightly different. Hopefully the lesson is learned and not repeated, but if this is/was the first time of something like this happening, the person is looking for a little support (this lady was not hurt, nor was her dog, an apology was made - twice, a month later s lawsuit? Come on...). Yes, a slap on the wrist, or if needed advice and reasoning as to where they went wrong (we are talking about first offenses not repeat consistent occurrences). Instead, a bunch of higher than thou comments were consistently being made and it irked me, to be completely honest. Read the posts... People on this board, even very knowledgeable and capable people are not perfect... To get slammed for it repeatedly isn't right.
> 
> Now, since he has been on the board since 2008 and this could be a consistent happening that I don't know about, then my message can be disregarded


What the OP wants is not a little support. The OP wants us all to villify the lady who was charged by his dogs. And, he wants us to validate him. So sorry. No way. These threads are read by more than just the OP. And your general reader has to know that we just don't have the luxury of the attitude "accidents happen." If an accident happens with a GSD, the GSD may be euthanized, and it may not be our choice at all. We HAVE to be more careful. 

This guy dodged a bullet. His dog did not bite the lady or bite her dog. The bullet has been dodged because Animal Control did not come down and impound his dog, and some judge somewhere is not making the decision between life and death for his dog. The rest of it is just money, and maybe his HOI. 

We can all be Stepford posters and say, "Wow, how awful." "It will be fine." "Don't worry about it." But in the end, are we being true to ourselves or the breed when we do not come down on people who obviously dodged a bullet and are now blaming everyone but themselves? And just blaming yourself ISN'T good enough. You have to make changes. 

He knows his dogs will attack other dogs. Happened in the dog park. Who cares whose dog started stuff. His dog will go that far. He knows it and he knew it before this incident. So the excuses are running thin. 

At the end of the day, I want dogs to be alive. If, or maybe I should say, when his dogs have another accident, someone is going to start tallying them, and if you are standing before the judge and he sees one incident or if he sees multiple incidents, whose dog do you think is going to get a pass, and whose dog will be given the needle?


----------



## Hineni7 (Nov 8, 2014)

I can't speak for the past incident as I don't know the logistics of it. And, from what I read here, his dogs are not people or dog aggressive, so this was an isolated incident from what this post intimates. I don't think anybody gave him a pass, no one fact jumped to his defense and everyone stated it was his responsibility which he affirmed. And vilify the lady?? Yes, for a litigious action that wasn't warranted? You bet! Far worse occurs (right or wrong) and nothing is done. She chose to pursue an action in which she has no legal leg to stand on. No one or animal was injured. Scared, perhaps, but honestly if her dog ran up to someone terrified of dogs (and I have a SIL who is) and jumped on them or even just barked circles and she laughed it off because her dog is small would we not be angry in her defense if she received a lawsuit? Keep in mind, I am not letting the OP off, he is responsible and needs to train his dogs better on recall and or make sure they are behind a fence or on a leash, but this action was benign.... Nothing happened! For the lady to make it into a blown up incident does no less damage to our breeds reputation then did a bite actually occurred. 

I too am all for the dog. I definitely don't want to see dog put down due to negligence. Again, if this is not an isolated incident and this is common behavior for his dogs then I am on board ripping some common sense into him for his dogs sake (and other people's safety). But this is not the impression I am getting. And we ALL have had incidents that either were let go by generous people or LUCKILY never turned into something. So to beat someone over the head with the 'your fault' when he has already admitted it is just overboard, imo. If he was denying responsibility or was flippant about the incident (he apologized 2x and checked for injuries thoroughly of which there were none) then let the witch hunt commence (lol). 

Anyhow, I think we agree on most points just differ on intensity of reprimand.


----------



## SuperG (May 11, 2013)

Hineni7 said:


> I can't speak for the past incident as I don't know the logistics of it. And, from what I read here, his dogs are not people or dog aggressive, so this was an isolated incident from what this post intimates. I don't think anybody gave him a pass, no one fact jumped to his defense and everyone stated it was his responsibility which he affirmed. And vilify the lady?? Yes, for a litigious action that wasn't warranted? You bet! Far worse occurs (right or wrong) and nothing is done. She chose to pursue an action in which she has no legal leg to stand on. No one or animal was injured. Scared, perhaps, but honestly if her dog ran up to someone terrified of dogs (and I have a SIL who is) and jumped on them or even just barked circles and she laughed it off because her dog is small would we not be angry in her defense if she received a lawsuit? Keep in mind, I am not letting the OP off, he is responsible and needs to train his dogs better on recall and or make sure they are behind a fence or on a leash, but this action was benign.... Nothing happened! For the lady to make it into a blown up incident does no less damage to our breeds reputation then did a bite actually occurred.
> 
> I too am all for the dog. I definitely don't want to see dog put down due to negligence. Again, if this is not an isolated incident and this is common behavior for his dogs then I am on board ripping some common sense into him for his dogs sake (and other people's safety). But this is not the impression I am getting. And we ALL have had incidents that either were let go by generous people or LUCKILY never turned into something. So to beat someone over the head with the 'your fault' when he has already admitted it is just overboard, imo. If he was denying responsibility or was flippant about the incident (he apologized 2x and checked for injuries thoroughly of which there were none) then let the witch hunt commence (lol).
> 
> Anyhow, I think we agree on most points just differ on intensity of reprimand.



Sounds pretty reasonable to me....if that matters...


SuperG


----------



## KathrynApril (Oct 3, 2013)

selzer said:


> What the OP wants is not a little support. The OP wants us all to villify the lady who was charged by his dogs. And, he wants us to validate him. So sorry. No way. These threads are read by more than just the OP. And your general reader has to know that we just don't have the luxury of the attitude "accidents happen." If an accident happens with a GSD, the GSD may be euthanized, and it may not be our choice at all. We HAVE to be more careful.
> 
> This guy dodged a bullet. His dog did not bite the lady or bite her dog. The bullet has been dodged because Animal Control did not come down and impound his dog, and some judge somewhere is not making the decision between life and death for his dog. The rest of it is just money, and maybe his HOI.
> 
> ...


Very very true in everything you are saying and that he really needs to do a better job about managing his dogs. It still doesn't change my opinion that this lady seems to be suit-happy though.


----------



## Ace GSD (May 30, 2014)

selzer said:


> Sometimes saying you're sorry isn't enough. Sometimes you have to say you are sorry, and you are getting the yard fenced, and taking the dogs to more training, and not just say it, you need to ante up and do it.
> 
> Anyone can have a lax moment. True, but what happened in 2008? What about the dog park incident? This fellow is giving GSDs a terrible rep, and it isn't like it is all that good as it was. When a dog bites someone, I am usually one of the few who isn't that sorry to see someone put the dog down, depending on the situation of course. Because that dog already screwed up the GSD bite-numbers, why should one dog be having multiple bite incidents. Well, here we have an owner with multiple dog-incidents.
> 
> ...


Selzer maybe sound hard but he is right !! If you care enough for your dogs then do whatever it takes . We are talking about chance of losing the dogs here.


----------



## JakodaCD OA (May 14, 2000)

> Very very true in everything you are saying and that he really needs to do a better job about managing his dogs. It still doesn't change my opinion that this lady seems to be suit-happy though.


Totally agree with the above ^^


----------



## armauro (May 6, 2008)

*Anyone can have a lax moment. True, but what happened in 2008? What about the dog park incident? This fellow is giving GSDs a terrible rep, and it isn't like it is all that good as it was. When a dog bites someone, I am usually one of the few who isn't that sorry to see someone put the dog down, depending on the situation of course. Because that dog already screwed up the GSD bite-numbers, why should one dog be having multiple bite incidents. Well, here we have an owner with multiple dog-incidents. 
*I do not know what happened in 08 as I got my first shep in June 2008.
As far as dog park incident- When a dog attacks one of your dogs *unprovoked*- and your pack leader runs over to defend the female-and the stupid owner of the other dog reaches in to leash his dog- that is dumb and negligence. In fact, it is an open question whether his own dog bit him.
*So why are you faulting me*- it is a big offleash park- question is whether sheps should be there and there is great prejudice against them there even though they are dog friendly .


----------



## armauro (May 6, 2008)

As afar as my dog being put down- woman does not know who bit her? She was a paramedic and I believe she created the puncture marks to make a case. My lawyer believes this is a 15k case.
Animal control believes this incident is being blown out of proportion and will not even issue me a ticket. Their advice is to watch out as she has it in for me.

As far as managing my dogs-they are highly trained in obedience and one in protection work- BUT never lose sight of the fact - THEY ARE DOGS and not machines and when in a group of two or more the dynamics change.


----------



## martemchik (Nov 23, 2010)

WAIT!

There are puncture marks...I find it hard to believe that someone with that much money (as the claim is being made) would physically hurt themselves and create "fake" puncture wounds in order to "make a case." The marginal benefit of this just isn't logical. Like...if you have X million dollars already, it's not really worth your while to create a puncture wound (quite painful as I've been bitten a few times myself) to make a couple thousand dollars...

This is why you can never just believe the one side of the story. Clearly all the facts being listed are being skewed towards the one side. It's completely irrational to blindly believe any and all facts that are given in these types of stories.

Fun discussion, not in any way serious since its on the forum. Everything being discussed is highly hypothetical. But it's kind of fun to see someone rationalize allowing their "protection trained" dog to run about and giving "pack dynamics" as a reason why the dog isn't controllable. I'm sure this is an excuse that all of us in the Schutzhund/bite sport community love to hear. Could be fun if this ever does go to court to see how the judge/jury react to you telling them that one of the dogs that was running around this woman and her dog was protection trained.

Another fun thing to do...for all of those that might not follow this forum that much, or be new to it, click on armauro (OP's) name, and check out some of the threads he's started. Let's use that to establish some sort of "credibility" or history about the person so that we might get a better sense of the kind of person they are. Since this thread seems to be all about who's guilty and who's innocent, I feel like this is something that's important to do as it will give people a little more insight into the information being given and the information they are using in order to proclaim guilt and innocence in this situation.


----------



## Debanneball (Aug 28, 2014)

Bit confused here... First post has no puncture wounds, no puncture in pants... Is this the same lady, or the dog park lady with the punctures?


----------



## llombardo (Dec 11, 2011)

I have a huge pack and am very diligent that they are contained. Most of them have a decent to high prey drive and I know this. I also know how much damage and/or trauma they can cause if they were to rush anyone or another dog. Accidents happen, but are they accidents if as owners we knowingly let them out without a leash and trust recall only? Accidents are when they open the door and escape and the owner had no clue or even in the process of training they dash out the door, which both of those can end tragically too. My pup just got out on me this past weekend, he opened the door and trotted to the neighbor wagging his tail, the bad part? A car was coming and nearly gave me a heart attack. All the other dogs could have came out with him and I am sure one of them would have been hit, but they all stayed put. Now I know what the pup can do and I work with him on wait. Part of management is to be aware of the what ifs and to not allow them to happen to begin with. 

My question to the OP, have you learned anything through this? Do you still think that the dogs recall is enough? Will they be leashed at all times?


----------



## llombardo (Dec 11, 2011)

Debanneball said:


> Bit confused here... First post has no puncture wounds, no puncture in pants... Is this the same lady, or the dog park lady with the punctures?


I believe puncture marks is the dog park incident.


----------



## Gwenhwyfair (Jul 27, 2010)

First post. Date is August 2014.

Hence my earlier comment in this thread about a pattern. I hope the OP works extra hard to prevent another incident.

http://www.germanshepherds.com/forum/general-information/476538-dog-park-disaster-beware.html


----------



## selzer (May 7, 2005)

armauro said:


> The irony of all this is when I walked to her house to apologize the second time all was cool. She was not hurt neither was her little dog. She spoke to me in a calm way and asked to keep them on leash. If one is bit by a gsd there is some serious injury.
> 
> In my development this is getting blown out of proportion in so many ways. There is not a single police or animal control nuisance report on any of my dogs since 2008 but if you were to listen to these people I had wild dogs roaming the neighborhood.
> 
> It is the breed that generates such negative feedback.





armauro said:


> *Anyone can have a lax moment. True, but what happened in 2008? What about the dog park incident? This fellow is giving GSDs a terrible rep, and it isn't like it is all that good as it was. When a dog bites someone, I am usually one of the few who isn't that sorry to see someone put the dog down, depending on the situation of course. Because that dog already screwed up the GSD bite-numbers, why should one dog be having multiple bite incidents. Well, here we have an owner with multiple dog-incidents.
> *I do not know what happened in 08 as I got my first shep in June 2008.
> As far as dog park incident- When a dog attacks one of your dogs *unprovoked*- and your pack leader runs over to defend the female-and the stupid owner of the other dog reaches in to leash his dog- that is dumb and negligence. In fact, it is an open question whether his own dog bit him.
> *So why are you faulting me*- it is a big offleash park- question is whether sheps should be there and there is great prejudice against them there even though they are dog friendly .


I don't know what happened in 'O8 either, but there must have been something, else why this comment? 

I am faulting you because your attitude in the post you made, about the lady who your dog maybe bit, maybe scratched, maybe just tried to be interested in her little dog. You are acting like she should just chalk it up to dogs will be dogs. 

Just because most of us on this forum would. 

Well, not so sure about that. Some on this forum are just waiting to whip out their concealed carry and blast both of your dogs onto the rainbow bridge. 

And others on this forum would be screaming to animal control about your dogs. Or would be, if they were ankle-biters. 

But, just because a goodly number of us would give you a dirty look and go about our business, doesn't mean people who do not own large, formidable dogs want a pair of them charging out at us and going for our dog. 

She doesn't even know which one bit her? They're GSDs! If a couple of sheep ran over and one of them stepped on your foot, would you be able to say for sure which one did? Really? In the heat of a dog incident, where she is grabbing a hold of her small dog so it doesn't get eaten, and feels something make contact to her bum, she is supposed to identify which one did it, and if she can't, tough luck lady, you must be lying. 

There are puncture wounds, then she got bit. And even if she got bit by her OWN dog because your dogs were not under control and rushed out frightening her and her dog, and caused her leashed dog to react, then it is STILL your fault. 

Dude, get your well-trained dogs under control. Because they are not well enough trained. Sorry. Just stop with the excuses, pay for your lax moment and be more careful. I hope your dogs do not have to pay the price for this.


----------



## Gwenhwyfair (Jul 27, 2010)

Sue,

The puncture wounds are not associated with this incident but the dog park incident in Aug. 2014, link to thread in post above.


----------



## selzer (May 7, 2005)

Gwenhwyfair said:


> Sue,
> 
> The puncture wounds are not associated with this incident but the dog park incident in Aug. 2014, link to thread in post above.


This is so confusing. The dog park incident was a dude, who was maybe bit by HIS own dog. 

He is saying SHE doesn't know who bit her, SHE created the puncture marks. I think he is talking about the lady. 15k.


----------



## Muskeg (Jun 15, 2012)

I see both sides here. But I will say that us with pointy eared "police dogs" need to be extra vigilant and up our training so our dogs can't be accused of any sort of aggression. I am in a huge pit of horror right now because I am well known to own shepherds in town because I am out training so much, and have become the target of a Facebook witch hunt that has taken a life of it's own. It's like a nightmare. Even playing tug with your dog in public is risky. And posting photos of it that can be viewed publicly is also risky. Videos, breeding details, addresses, phone numbers, dogs names (if you are active in training or sport) etc. can all be Googled. Be careful, people. Don't give anyone a reason to ever pinpoint your dog for aggression. Facebook is full of computer warriors who will threaten your family from the safety of the keyboard. They can make your life not worth living.


----------



## JoanMcM (Dec 5, 2013)

Muskeg said:


> I see both sides here. But I will say that us with pointy eared "police dogs" need to be extra vigilant and up our training so our dogs can't be accused of any sort of aggression. I am in a huge pit of horror right now because I am well known to own shepherds in town because I am out training so much, and have become the target of a Facebook witch hunt that has taken a life of it's own. It's like a nightmare. Even playing tug with your dog in public is risky. And posting photos of it that can be viewed publicly is also risky. Videos, breeding details, addresses, phone numbers, dogs names (if you are active in training or sport) etc. can all be Googled. Be careful, people. Don't give anyone a reason to ever pinpoint your dog for aggression. Facebook is full of computer warriors who will threaten your family from the safety of the keyboard. They can make your life not worth living.


 I have heard similar complaints by others on social media. It is very sad and disturbing that people will go so far out of their way to hurt another being. Can you report the people harassing you on Facebook? 

I had someone go so far out of their way to harass and try to bully me (not about dogs, about something else that was equally not their business and basically manufactured by them) I was on the verge of sending them a letter from my lawyer. This can be helpful in toning things down.


----------



## JakodaCD OA (May 14, 2000)

I'm not condoning what the dogs did, but HE (OP) is saying his dogs DID NOT BITE THE WOMAN in this incident, nor did they BITE her dog. He also said the woman herself told him the dogs did NOT BITE HER OR HER DOG, she did not seek medical help, she did not file a report, the only thing she did was file is a lawsuit. 

Again, I am not condoning what happened. I will say this tho, if someone is going to sue me for something my dog did, they better darn well have a good reason for doing so, they better have sought out medical help, filed a report and have proof to back it up (as in pictures of bites/scratches whatever)..

I will also say again, to many people are sue happy these days for no reason at all.

I agree with being vigilant and responsible for the dogs we choose to own. I guess I would ask, how would you feel if your dog charged someone, maybe even scratched them and all of a sudden your slapped with a lawsuit ? Again, not condoning, but it could happen to anyone.


----------



## Debanneball (Aug 28, 2014)

selzer said:


> This is so confusing. The dog park incident was a dude, who was maybe bit by HIS own dog.
> 
> He is saying SHE doesn't know who bit her, SHE created the puncture marks. I think he is talking about the lady. 15k.


Me too..confused..


----------



## Kayos and Havoc (Oct 17, 2002)

JakodaCD OA said:


> I'm not condoning what the dogs did, but HE (OP) is saying his dogs DID NOT BITE THE WOMAN in this incident, nor did they BITE her dog. He also said the woman herself told him the dogs did NOT BITE HER OR HER DOG, she did not seek medical help, she did not file a report, the only thing she did was file is a lawsuit.
> 
> Again, I am not condoning what happened. I will say this tho, if someone is going to sue me for something my dog did, they better darn well have a good reason for doing so, they better have sought out medical help, filed a report and have proof to back it up (as in pictures of bites/scratches whatever)..
> 
> ...


Absolutely. 

I do not even let my dogs on the front lawn or driveway unless they are leashed. They have good recalls but stuff happens. 

I too cab see both sides. I have 3 GSD's and I would be afraid if I saw a strange GSD running at me. I can sure understand the lady being terrified but there is no grounds for a lawsuit. 

And - in OK even if my dogs are fenced, if they run the fence and bark at people they can be considered dangerous because their behavior is "threatening". I have a 6 ft privacy fence with a padlocked gate. Most of my neighbors are terrified of my dogs despite that they have not earned this. One neighbor thinks since my gate is locked and I have a 6 ft privacy fence the dogs must be mean. No - that is for the dog's protection. I cannot see my gate from the house and I don't want some ******* thinking it might be fun to open it in the middle of the night allowing my dogs to get out when I let them out to potty when I get at 4 AM. 

We need to take reasonable measures to control our dogs. And yes - I too have dropped the ball in this area. Everyone does at one time or another. We can only hope no one is offended or hurt and do better the next time. 

Selzer, hate to say it but I almost can't wait to hear about your encounters. I am certain you too have dropped the ball at least once in your life.


----------



## Gwenhwyfair (Jul 27, 2010)

I think the problem here isn't that we've all dropped the ball, which is true.

It's that Amauro, based on what he has shared here in the past, looks to have a pattern.

One - not careful enough with control (leash or training)

Two - has a tendency to not take full responsibility RE: blaming people in CT and it's laws, blaming people in FL, blaming them for being rich and so on. It turned into an anti-gov't rant with the dog park incident.

I re-looked at that dog park thread, I and several others were generally supportive but commented that we hoped he took the right lesson from that incident. I don't think that's happened, therein lies the problem.


----------



## Gwenhwyfair (Jul 27, 2010)

Wow, that's terrible. I've not run into that myself. My trainer posts up pictures of doing bite work with his dogs openly on his page and doesn't get any real grief. In fact he gets quite a few 'likes'. 

Nothing on facebook should make you feel that bad though.....

Shut your FB down and make it totally private would be my suggestion.





Muskeg said:


> I see both sides here. But I will say that us with pointy eared "police dogs" need to be extra vigilant and up our training so our dogs can't be accused of any sort of aggression. I am in a huge pit of horror right now because I am well known to own shepherds in town because I am out training so much, and have become the target of a Facebook witch hunt that has taken a life of it's own. It's like a nightmare. Even playing tug with your dog in public is risky. And posting photos of it that can be viewed publicly is also risky. Videos, breeding details, addresses, phone numbers, dogs names (if you are active in training or sport) etc. can all be Googled. Be careful, people. Don't give anyone a reason to ever pinpoint your dog for aggression. Facebook is full of computer warriors who will threaten your family from the safety of the keyboard. They can make your life not worth living.


----------



## selzer (May 7, 2005)

Kayos and Havoc said:


> Absolutely.
> 
> I do not even let my dogs on the front lawn or driveway unless they are leashed. They have good recalls but stuff happens.
> 
> ...


 
Kathy, I'm pretty transparent really. I have discussed my encounters. The main one was Arwen getting loose and lost for 19 days. Horrible time. Anything could have happened. I was very fortunate to get her back. It has been 12 years, and none of my dogs have ever been out of the yard again without me. I built fences, and figured out how to do it economically. I put kennels inside the fence to make sure that even if I screw up and do not latch one well, my dogs will probably still be safe. All of the dogs have good recall, and I can let them run to my car or from my car to my house without being connected. 

I haven't been in a situation where my dogs have charged anyone or attacked anyone's dog. Yet. Now that I said that... I do have a dog that HATES horses, and if I let him run to my car at the wrong moment, some Amish dude might be very upset with me. Because I know that, I try to be extra careful. One of my youngsters is willing to run over to the neighbors, so I bring him in from the front on lead. 

If I get sued, my homeowner's insurance will get nailed. No choice there. I cannot ante up a couple of thou to get someone to not go after me. How will I get homeowner's insurance again with my dogs if I get sued for my dogs biting someone. I would probably have to give up my dogs, and that would flat out kill me. I suppose that makes me some kind of fatalist -- if that is someone who looks at the worst possible scenario as being what will happen. But if it keeps my dogs safe, and with me, then it is what I have to do. I can't afford a dog-bite lawsuit, or even being accused of it. My dogs lives depend upon it. 

The lady has puncture wounds. If you were walking down the street and someone's unleashed dogs rushed you and your dog, and you came away with puncture wounds, what would you do? What if you notice the dogs were unleashed again? What if you found out the guy's dogs had other issues? I don't know, but I think if we were hearing this from the other side, our advice would be a lot different.


----------



## Hineni7 (Nov 8, 2014)

I don't believe the puncture wounds were from this incident. She said she had no injuries - both times he apologized. The puncture wounds were from the dog fight at the park. Although I can see where the confusion is in his posts..


----------



## huntergreen (Jun 28, 2012)

is the op following this thread any longer?


----------



## Chai (Dec 11, 2014)

As owners of a dog breed with a bad reputation, warranted or not, we have a responsibility to not let anything like this happen. Even if the dogs were just bounding over to say "hello", it is likely that a stranger will just see the bad reputation on 8 legs rushing to attack them and their dog. It just looks reaallly bad. Especially for a non-GSD person.

Is this unfair? yup. But when we made a commitment to enter the world of GSD ownership, battling decades of negative history and stereotype kinda came with the package. Of course, we are human, and we make mistakes. So it's important to acknowledge them and use them as lessons, for the sake of our dogs and the betterment of our ownership skills. Goodness, I have made a myriad of mistakes, all from which I have learned. 

I hope the OP has taken further steps to ensure a similar incident never happens again.


----------



## Gwenhwyfair (Jul 27, 2010)

Probably not.

Good morning Steve. 




huntergreen said:


> is the op following this thread any longer?


----------



## JoanMcM (Dec 5, 2013)

I had one deaf neighbor that would let his dog into our yard. The owner would hold one end of the longline leash on one side of our 35 6-12 foot high lilacs which made a wall with the street and our yard and allow his dog to walk under the bushes to do business in my yard. Picture the bushes hiding him while his dog pooped in my yard. 

One morning I did not realize the poodle was in my yard and let the dogs out. Our 2 GSDs and one mix went out and chased the poodle out of our yard scaring it. My dogs never went over the boundary line. The guy comes into the yard with a huge stick threatening me and the dogs. I recalled my dogs and put them on a down while this guy is yelling who knows what waving this large walking stick and is now well on my property threatening us. By the time he made it halfway across the property, he thought twice about it when he saw that the dogs were not moving off the down but still watching him. He turned around and left. In my mind the decision was, if this guy and this large stick does not think twice and makes it to where I am and the dogs are, when do I tell the dogs to break the stay.

My dogs were extremely well trained. One bitch would keep my toddlers within the property line. Eventually I did put up a 6 foot fence to make sure other dogs and people stayed OUT so there would not be an incident and also I would not have to stay out there when the dogs were out.

We never took them off the property without leashes on unless at a training situation. 

One dog did leave the property when he was an elderly dog (14) when someone left the gate open. A neighbor was out painting his porch so the dog went over there and laid down on the porch. Guess he thought he was going for a visit. I had to break the dog out of jail and he had paint on him. The guy could of just returned him. The guy was an idiot but my dog should of been on my property and not laying down on his paint. That was the only incident we had.

Anyway after our dogs passed and we moved the neighbors told us their houses started getting broken into. They said my dogs must of been a deterrent.


----------



## Debanneball (Aug 28, 2014)

Very nice! Well behaved dogs, may my Fritz be that good someday.. Also, hope the first house broken into was the paint idiot!






JoanMcM said:


> I had one deaf neighbor that would let his dog into our yard. The owner would hold one end of the longline leash on one side of our 35 6-12 foot high lilacs which made a wall with the street and our yard and allow his dog to walk under the bushes to do business in my yard. Picture the bushes hiding him while his dog pooped in my yard.
> 
> One morning I did not realize the poodle was in my yard and let the dogs out. Our 2 GSDs and one mix went out and chased the poodle out of our yard scaring it. My dogs never went over the boundary line. The guy comes into the yard with a huge stick threatening me and the dogs. I recalled my dogs and put them on a down while this guy is yelling who knows what waving this large walking stick and is now well on my property threatening us. By the time he made it halfway across the property, he thought twice about it when he saw that the dogs were not moving off the down but still watching him. He turned around and left. In my mind the decision was, if this guy and this large stick does not think twice and makes it to where I am and the dogs are, when do I tell the dogs to break the stay.
> 
> ...


----------



## huntergreen (Jun 28, 2012)

hi jax!


----------



## Blondi's Revenge (Jan 31, 2015)

is there insurance that covers dog bites?


----------



## huntergreen (Jun 28, 2012)

blondie...you need to add it to your homeowners. i have never had it.


----------



## Kayos and Havoc (Oct 17, 2002)

We have what is called an umbrella policy. It cover us for dog bites that would exceed our homeowners policy as well as catastrophes.


----------

