# Who is liable?



## malinois_16 (Aug 8, 2010)

My friend called me to ask me a couple questions. 

Her boyfriend has a German Shepherd, hes 7 years old and has the worst hips and knees. He is restricted to leash walking at a slow pace only. 

Yesterday he was walking and the one neighbour who lives about 10 houses up has a 1.5 year old lab mix. This dog isnt trained, it jumps up still, and gets into other dogs faces etc.

This lab was off leash, and before her boyfriend could turn his Shepherd around this lab bolts off the owners property and charges his Shepherd. The lab mix jumped on the Shepherd and knocked him over, kept playing with him as my friends boy friend dropped his dogs leash (he wasnt going anywhere) to grab hold of the lab mix to pull him off. He didnt bite or anything. 

But this lab mix caused damage to his Shepherd. He may need to use a wheelchair (Doggie one) for the rest of his life because he threw out his back end by jumping on him. The vet bill is well over $1000.

My friend is trying to tell her Boyfriend to go after the owner for damages because there is a leash law in her city. The Shepherd was leashed under the law and the lab mix was not.

Do you think the lab mix owner should pay? There were 4 witnesses in favour of the Shepherd owner. Or do you think they should just leave it? I told them I would at least talk to a lawyer and if he thinks they can get money I would go for it.

This is the very reason I refuse to walk by my one neighbours house, her dog is exactly like this lab mix and Lincoln doesnt tolerate rude dogs and I am worried this dog will get past me and do something to Lincolns joints.


----------



## KZoppa (Aug 14, 2010)

if there are witnesses and there is in fact a leash law, i would go after them for damages and costs incurred because their dog caused damage to the shepherd.


----------



## DharmasMom (Jul 4, 2010)

Have they talked to the owner's of the lab yet? I would at least go talk to them first and explain the situation and tell them that because of their carelessness and neglect of the law that my dog had been permanently disabled and that I expected them to make it right (or as right as it can be made). If they refused then I would call a lawyer. That is horribly sad that their stupidity has done this to that dog.


----------



## GSD07 (Feb 23, 2007)

The maximum amount you can get in the most favorable case is the cost you payed for your dog when you acquired him. Think totaled car. 

A few years ago, one of my neighbors fell on my dog because she couldn't keep her morbidly obese herself straight, dislocated my dog's hip which caused thousands in vet bills, not to mention the changes in our lives. We never even got 'sorry' from that neighbor, forget about the money, and I'm sure it's because she was afraid that she could be sued.


----------



## malinois_16 (Aug 8, 2010)

Well the vet bill is already at $2300 and thats not counting the wheelchair they will have to order. They only paid $1000 for the dog. 

One year, a guy sued the police department because his little poodle mix was mauled by an off duty police dog not leashed. The vet bill trying to save this little dog was $5000. They sued and got everything back including the price of the dog so they got $5800 back.

I think they do it with animals differently. A car is a car and sometimes its better off replacing then fixing it. But a dog is a family member, even tho its viewed as property its live and I dont think a judge will say put the dog down and get another one heres the cost of the dog. I have yet to see that happen. 

They have spoken to the lab owners, they basically told them if their dog cant play like the tough boys to lock it in he house. So that pretty much says they have no desire to pay


----------



## DharmasMom (Jul 4, 2010)

GSD07 said:


> The maximum amount you can get in the most favorable case is the cost you payed for your dog when you acquired him. Think totaled car.
> 
> 
> A few years ago, one of my neighbors fell on my dog because she couldn't keep her morbidly obese herself straight, dislocated my dog's hip which caused thousands in vet bills, not to mention the changes in our lives. We never even got 'sorry' from that neighbor, forget about the money, and I'm sure it's because she was afraid that she could be sued.


Wow. That is ridiculous. So someone can totally screw up your dog's life and cause a HUGE hardship to your life both emotionally, financially and even physically and completely walk away. You should at least be able to punch them then or something.

I am sorry to hear that about your dog. That is nuts that she didn't have to pay for anything.


----------



## crackem (Mar 29, 2006)

I would give them the opportunity to do right, if that was indeed their response, the next communication would be thru the court system


----------



## DharmasMom (Jul 4, 2010)

malinois_16 said:


> Well the vet bill is already at $2300 and thats not counting the wheelchair they will have to order. They only paid $1000 for the dog.
> 
> One year, a guy sued the police department because his little poodle mix was mauled by an off duty police dog not leashed. The vet bill trying to save this little dog was $5000. They sued and got everything back including the price of the dog so they got $5800 back.
> 
> ...


What jerks!!! I would call a lawyer then!!


----------



## Freestep (May 1, 2011)

DharmasMom said:


> Have they talked to the owner's of the lab yet? I would at least go talk to them first and explain the situation and tell them that because of their carelessness and neglect of the law that my dog had been permanently disabled and that I expected them to make it right (or as right as it can be made). If they refused then I would call a lawyer. That is horribly sad that their stupidity has done this to that dog.


^^^This. Give them a chance to make it right outside of court. Bring a voice recorder with you, or at least take careful notes of what the neighbor said. If it comes down to a lawsuit, this will help you.

Ironically, if the neighbor expresses remorse, this will help your case. If the owner denies any responsibility, you still have the leash law and the witnesses on your side.


----------



## Lilie (Feb 3, 2010)

malinois_16 said:


> Her boyfriend has a German Shepherd, hes 7 years old and has the worst hips and knees. He is restricted to leash walking at a slow pace only.


He might have a hard time proving that all the injuries his dog received were directly related to the incident.


----------



## malinois_16 (Aug 8, 2010)

What happens here is a 3 step process.

First, you have to try to work it out by yourself (which was already done)

Next you file for court. Small claims. You serve them the paper work and give them a chance to tell their side. Then a date is set in court for mediation. A mediator will sit down with both parties together and figure out if an agreement can be made outside of court. When this happens this will be documented against the owner in case another incident happens with the lab they can refer back to this and say Hey it wasnt the first time.

If no agreement can be made it goes to a judge. Where a judge will review the evidence and decide who is responsible. 

She spoke to her lawyer (who is also a good friend of hers) who said he cannot take the case due to conflict of interest but he said if there were witnesses that can say the Shepherd was leashed, and the lab was not the judge who handles these cases in court will grant the full amount of vet bills whether it be $800 (lower then the cost of the dog) of $25,000. It only goes up to $25,000 anything high in amount goes to a higher court. But shes only asking for vet bills back and some emotional damages.


----------



## malinois_16 (Aug 8, 2010)

Well the dog was up and walking the second before this lab got all bouncy. Not hard to prove. The dog has bad hips and knees to begin with doesnt mean another dog cant make them worse.


----------



## anngie (Mar 24, 2003)

Lilie said:


> He might have a hard time proving that all the injuries his dog received were directly related to the incident.


I'm thinking the same thing. One of my GSDs had a hip surgery at age 7 but I still would not have chanced walking him afterward where there were dogs off leash. Same with my last GSD who had a spinal problem. I stopped walking him when little dogs would come out and nip his legs. 
If his hips and knees were already bad, I sympathize but think he probably should have had him out walking on the street. Is there a leash law there?


----------



## malinois_16 (Aug 8, 2010)

He was walking on the street leashed. The lab was not leashed. There are strict lash laws. Just because his dog has hip/knee issues doesnt mean he should coop his dog up. People should be able to go outside and not encounter an unruley off leash dog when in fact the dog should be leashed. If not then the owner who did not follow the law should be liable IMO. They were not at an off leash dog park...

The lab spotted him as he turned around (he saw the lab and tried to walk home as fast as he could). This was at least 5 houses up.


----------



## Jax's Mom (Apr 2, 2010)

Dog Owners' Liability Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. D.16


----------



## malinois_16 (Aug 8, 2010)

According to DOLA

*Owner to prevent dog from attacking*
*5.1* The owner of a dog shall exercise reasonable precautions to prevent it from,
(a) biting or attacking a person or domestic animal; or
(b) behaving in a manner that poses a menace to the safety of persons or domestic animals. 2005, c. 2, s. 1 (15).


Section B would apply here and therefore the owner of that lab did not take proper precautions to tie the dog up, which in turn poses a menace to the safety of another domestic animal (the Shepherd)


So basically this means the labs owner will be held liable


----------



## Jax's Mom (Apr 2, 2010)

Civil Liability

Liability of owner
*2.**(1)**The owner of a dog is liable for damages resulting from a bite or attack by the dog on another person or domestic animal. R.S.O. 1990, c.*D.16, s.*2*(1).*
Where more than one owner
(2)**Where there is more than one owner of a dog, they are jointly and severally liable under this section. R.S.O. 1990, c.*D.16, s.*2*(2).
Extent of liability
*(3)**The liability of the owner does not depend upon knowledge of the propensity of the dog or fault or negligence on the part of the owner, but the court shall reduce the damages awarded in proportion to the degree, if any, to which the fault or negligence of the plaintiff caused or contributed to the damages. R.S.O. 1990, c.*D.16, s.*2*(3).*


Seems pretty clear to me...


----------



## malinois_16 (Aug 8, 2010)

Okay now I am confused with all this legal talk lol

Is the owner of the lab liable according to DOLA or not?


----------



## kr16 (Apr 30, 2011)

Was it on your property this happened? 

That may make a difference, if its city property, than they need to be notified of the events. 

You must file a complaint with the police department now, do not wait. Things have to be documented and in writing for any lawsuit or proof of events. Small claims court is always a good start and cheap to do. They have a max amount for smail claims , look that up. First research the local dog laws. meanwhile call the police now and file a report. The dogs owners homeowner insurance may be liable for this also. Find out if thats doable.


----------



## malinois_16 (Aug 8, 2010)

It happened on city property. The Shepherd was leashed, the lab mix was not. Police do not deal with it. They told my friends boyfriend to call the spca who then informed them they have to take it to court as the most they could do was issue a ticket for the dog running at large


----------



## Jax's Mom (Apr 2, 2010)

You break it, you bought it 
(in this case, _they_ broke it, they bought it)
It doesn't matter if the owner knew their dog was dangerous, or the dog never bit anyone before, the dog was just playing, etc.
Just gather the bills, get the other owner's info and take them to small claims court if they don't think they're responsible.


----------



## Jax's Mom (Apr 2, 2010)

Small Claims Court - Ministry of the Attorney General


----------



## rblanshan (Jun 23, 2011)

This is just my $0.02 with my experience in court...though my experience is in family law, so totally different, but I can see a lot of similarities so I am chiming in. I completely agree that the owners of the lab mix are liable. However, it sounds like in order to prove that, your friend will have to hire an attorney. They are not cheap. They typically charge a lot per hour plus a retainer. Now, you can sue and win and get damages and maybe lawyer fees...not sure. However, and this is the point I want to stress...even if your friend wins the case, should the people decide not to pay, you then have to go after them, in a court of law, to try and enforce. Now, I don't know their financial situation, but I have been told "you can't beat blood out of a turnip". So if they don't have a lot of money, and they refuse to pay, the situation becomes even worse. Going to court is an emotional roller coaster. By all means, I am not saying your friends shouldn't hire an attorney, all I am saying is that is is a long, drawn out, complicated process that still may not result in what they want.


----------



## kr16 (Apr 30, 2011)

malinois_16 said:


> It happened on city property. The Shepherd was leashed, the lab mix was not. Police do not deal with it. They told my friends boyfriend to call the spca who then informed them they have to take it to court as the most they could do was issue a ticket for the dog running at large


 
Than the city has a liability on this one also. Call them tomorrow or at this point get a lawyer. A lawyer will sue the city and the homeowner. The city also has insurance for this I would think. 

Since you have an dog injury i would think they need to fill out a report.

Call your homeowners insurance, just make sure GSD were allowed to be in your house according to your policy, they sometimes ban certain dogs. see what they say. 

Homeowners insurance covers dog bites and damages. My son was mauled by a neighbors dog and their homeowners insurance covered all the bills. i doubt this person will give you his info so a lawyer might have to get it for you or maybe your homeowners company and see who it is.


----------



## malinois_16 (Aug 8, 2010)

The process is different in Canada. 

In small claims court a lawyer is optional. The laywer they spoke to informed them they have enough evidence they could defend themselves and win. Its small claims court, not criminal court. 

They dont have an option to pay, if they lose and a judgment is granted for the owner of the lab mix they put a garnishment on their pay check. The only way they couldnt is if they werent working or were on Disability or Welfare which they are not. They work. 

Or payment plans can be worked out etc. They will have to pay, or they will be forced to via wage garnishment


----------



## malinois_16 (Aug 8, 2010)

kr16 said:


> Than the city has a liability on this one also. Call them tomorrow or at this point get a lawyer. A lawyer will sue the city and the homeowner. The city also has insurance for this I would think.
> 
> Since you have an dog injury i would think they need to fill out a report.
> 
> ...


Their homeowners insurance doesnt breed ban. They know they have the dog. They wont cover it because it didnt happen on private property. They cannot sue the city, just the owner of the lab mix...


----------



## Jax's Mom (Apr 2, 2010)

malinois_16, keep in mind a lot of people are posting from a different country 
The city is in no way responsible and if there is a judgement made against the lab owners, they will pay. If they don't, it will be taken from any income they have, whether they like it or not.


----------



## kr16 (Apr 30, 2011)

malinois_16 said:


> Their homeowners insurance doesnt breed ban. They know they have the dog. They wont cover it because it didnt happen on private property. They cannot sue the city, just the owner of the lab mix...


 
homeowners insurance covers off of property also as if you car was broken into, in the city, they pick up things stolen from inside the car. 

So I would call yours to double check that. The dog is their property and it caused damage. Thats an easy thing to check on and maybe that will work out. if a dog runs off the owners property and mauls someone, the homeowners policy still has to cover it. At least thats how it works in the states.


----------



## middleofnowhere (Dec 20, 2000)

How you recoupe a judgement down here (lower 48) depends on the jurisdiction & the type of claim it is. Generally, in small claims court, if you win, you still have to collect independently of the court. That is it is up to you to turn it over to a collection agency.

Gosh, M16, you sure know a lot of hard luck cases.


----------



## malinois_16 (Aug 8, 2010)

middleofnowhere said:


> How you recoupe a judgement down here (lower 48) depends on the jurisdiction & the type of claim it is. Generally, in small claims court, if you win, you still have to collect independently of the court. That is it is up to you to turn it over to a collection agency.
> 
> Gosh, M16, you sure know a lot of hard luck cases.


Thats in the states, here in Canada the courts do that process of collecting for you. 

Gosh Middleofnowhere, thanks for noticing I know a lot of hard luck cases. 

Perhaps maybe it was a previous job I had I hear about all these things and I am the first person they call?


----------



## Jax's Mom (Apr 2, 2010)

Here you just file a Form 20P (Affidavit for Enforcement Request).
Our debts are treated differently here, part of the reason our housing market didn't tank was because people can't walk away from debts here (kind of sux if you had your heart set on foreclosed homes though)... you can walk away if you'd like, but you're still paying for it LOL


----------



## kr16 (Apr 30, 2011)

Jax's Mom said:


> Here you just file a Form 20P (Affidavit for Enforcement Request).
> Our debts are treated differently here, part of the reason our housing market didn't tank was because people can't walk away from debts here (kind of sux if you had your heart set on foreclosed homes though)... you can walk away if you'd like, but you're still paying for it LOL


 
These people here aren't walking away so easy, they are for now. They can come after them for as long long time and IM guessing they will at some point. Some lawyer will make a great living on that one. 

So what happens up their if you cant pay your mortgage and you don't?


----------



## malinois_16 (Aug 8, 2010)

If you cannot pay for your mortgage here you default and then your house goes into foreclosure. Then the mortgage company gets a judgment in court and garnishes your wages for whats left owing on the house. If your not currently working, the judgement sticks with you when you start working the garnishment will stick. 

The ONLY way you can get out of paying your debts is bankrupcy. I had to do that, thats when you have NO money etc. Thats the last option. 

Here you dont just walk away, you dont pay they will find you and if you havent filed bankrupcy your screwed


----------



## Jax's Mom (Apr 2, 2010)

Our system is slightly different. We don't have zero down mortgages... If you can't put down at least 20% of the purchase price, you must purchase mortgage insurance... The insurance is pretty expensive too, but if you can't pay your mortgage, the bank keeps your house and equity, and collects the rest from insurance, so more of an incentive not to default because I've never seen a house upside-down in payments here, so if you can't pay your mortgage, it's best to just sell quickly and run.


----------



## angelas (Aug 23, 2003)

Outstanding court fines and judgments also show up on your credit checks (likely they do in the US as well).

Anything you need a credit check for (bank loan, credit card, job application) and it will show up and can be held against you.


----------



## kr16 (Apr 30, 2011)

malinois_16 said:


> If you cannot pay for your mortgage here you default and then your house goes into foreclosure. Then the mortgage company gets a judgment in court and garnishes your wages for whats left owing on the house. If your not currently working, the judgement sticks with you when you start working the garnishment will stick.
> 
> The ONLY way you can get out of paying your debts is bankrupcy. I had to do that, thats when you have NO money etc. Thats the last option.
> 
> Here you dont just walk away, you dont pay they will find you and if you havent filed bankrupcy your screwed


Not a bad way of doing things at all. Similar here but collecting is really hard after a judgement here. Some people here just left their houses not that they couldnt afford them they were pissed the value dropped in half. 

Anyhow check the homeowners insurance, yours first, that just might work for you, it did for me here. And the incident wasnt on mine or their property. I think being it wasnt on their property its worse for them. 

Good luck with all that, hope it works out.


----------



## kr16 (Apr 30, 2011)

Jax's Mom said:


> Our system is slightly different. We don't have zero down mortgages... If you can't put down at least 20% of the purchase price, you must purchase mortgage insurance... The insurance is pretty expensive too, but if you can't pay your mortgage, the bank keeps your house and equity, and collects the rest from insurance, so more of an incentive not to default because I've never seen a house upside-down in payments here, so if you can't pay your mortgage, it's best to just sell quickly and run.


 
Most of the houses here also have that insurance and thats where the problem begins. The bank doesnt care if you default. They run you around and lie and decieve. they kill your credit. They have the insurance, your down payment, the present value of the house, plus they can come after you forever. Also the IRS can nail you for taxes on the huge loss. They havent been doing it but they can and as desperate as this country is for money I would be real scared to foreclose if it wasnt for the right reasons.


----------



## malinois_16 (Aug 8, 2010)

Its not my insurance I am looking at. I posted this inquiring for a friend. So I will tell her to check her house insurance. But as I said they only cover what happens on your property or in your house.


----------



## angelas (Aug 23, 2003)

Tell your friend to be VERY careful with how they word their inquiry.

Last year, when the city here flooded, my father asked his company if he was covered for flood damage as the basement flooring was destroyed and we should have removed about 12 inches of drywall around the base of the wall. It took them about 5 seconds for them to tell him no. Two months later when the house insurance was due they raised it $250 for "filing a claim."


----------



## Jax's Mom (Apr 2, 2010)

kr16 said:


> Most of the houses here also have that insurance and thats where the problem begins. The bank doesnt care if you default. They run you around and lie and decieve. they kill your credit. They have the insurance, your down payment, the present value of the house, plus they can come after you forever. Also the IRS can nail you for taxes on the huge loss. They havent been doing it but they can and as desperate as this country is for money I would be real scared to foreclose if it wasnt for the right reasons.


We also have a law that prevents banks from selling the house below market value, so as not to destroy the values of the homes around you. 
We do have "foreclosed" homes for sale, but they usually last about 4 seconds because they're being sold at $4k-$5k less.
It's always been pretty easy to sell a house in Canada if it's priced right so people usually know if they can't make the next payment (and normally banks will allow 2-3 built in missed payments), to just sell, no short sales and negotiating with the bank.


----------



## kr16 (Apr 30, 2011)

malinois_16 said:


> Its not my insurance I am looking at. I posted this inquiring for a friend. So I will tell her to check her house insurance. But as I said they only cover what happens on your property or in your house.


 
I sell insurance in the states and thats not the case here, so I hope your wrong and its the same up your way. I would have to read their policy to pick that apart. Laws are different in every state on insurance and of course I have no idea how they are up your way. 

All I know is the Leafs are horrible since the old man died, lol. 

So in Canada if your car gets stolen, and you put a claim into your homeowners for all the stolen stuff in the car, golf clubs, camera and hockey equipment, they would come back and say it wasnt on your property so you have no claim?

Those were the things I lost when my car was stolen in NYC and I live in Florida. My homeowners paid for all of it here. 

Same thing when my son was mauled on city property by a unleashed dog, their homeowners paid all the medical bills.


----------



## malinois_16 (Aug 8, 2010)

Heres one for ya Jaxs Mom

My friends house went into foreclosure. The bank had it listed at the difference he owed which was 100k. The house wasnt even worth 50k because it was sooooo badly taken care of. 

But some idiot bought it...

I have a few friends who work in insurance and the laws are different in the US then Canada


----------



## kr16 (Apr 30, 2011)

Jax's Mom said:


> We also have a law that prevents banks from selling the house below market value, so as not to destroy the values of the homes around you.
> We do have "foreclosed" homes for sale, but they usually last about 4 seconds because they're being sold at $4k-$5k less.
> It's always been pretty easy to sell a house in Canada if it's priced right so people usually know if they can't make the next payment (and normally banks will allow 2-3 built in missed payments), to just sell, no short sales and negotiating with the bank.


 
Wow, you guys do a lot of things better than us for sure. Thats just the right and fair way of doing it.


----------



## Jax's Mom (Apr 2, 2010)

That's about the only thing that's been done right and we're particularly proud of it :rofl:
I'd still rather live in the US though.


----------



## kr16 (Apr 30, 2011)

malinois_16 said:


> Heres one for ya.
> 
> My friends house went into foreclosure. The bank had it listed at the difference he owed which was 100k. The house wasnt even worth 50k because it was sooooo badly taken care of.
> 
> But some idiot bought it...


You can get houses on the west coast of Florida all day long for $80,000 and up. These same houses were selling 4 years ago for $250,000 and up. Cash is king here you can buy them up right in the courtrooms. very hard to get a loan here now, thats a big problem also.


----------



## kr16 (Apr 30, 2011)

Jax's Mom said:


> That's about the only thing that's been done right and we're particularly proud of it :rofl:
> I'd still rather live in the US though.


Id take Vancouver or Banff over the USA. This country is messed up and its only going to get worse.


----------



## TankGrrl66 (Jun 29, 2010)

The owners of the lab are absolutely at fault. Any question of it WILL be proven by the witnesses saying the dog was offleash (breaking leash law) and other witnesses to previous incidents. They are pretty :crazy:ed by a legal standpoint IMO.

OP, I know you said your friend tried to ask the lab owners about paying vet bills. 

Why not have them try it again with a copy of that code saying that the owner at fault has to pay? They were probably being so rude the first time bc they were seeing if they could get away with not paying for it. 

If you show them that they legally NEED to pay for it, it may change their minds without much of a struggle. Tell them their home insurance might cover it. It has some potential to still be worked out privately. 

Write what you say out in a letter and give it/mail it to them. Aquire as much proof as possible that you tried to solve it privately. 

If they are rude again, tell them you can and will take them to court...and that those laws you just showed them will pretty much garuntee they will have to pay more than the vet bill! (court fees, etc.)

They probably don't want to go to court. If they fight the whole way...they probably just cannot pay for it.


----------



## ShenzisMom (Apr 27, 2010)

Can I get a quick answer? What would have happened if the leashed dog bit the offleash dog, causing vet bills to the off leash dog?


----------



## Jax's Mom (Apr 2, 2010)

Deathmetal said:


> Can I get a quick answer? What would have happened if the leashed dog bit the offleash dog, causing vet bills to the off leash dog?


I've always wondered that myself, or if there was a "fight" and both dogs sustained injuries?


----------



## Jax's Mom (Apr 2, 2010)

kr16 said:


> So in Canada if your car gets stolen, and you put a claim into your homeowners for all the stolen stuff in the car, golf clubs, camera and hockey equipment, they would come back and say it wasnt on your property so you have no claim?


My policy tells me not to leave things in my car because they don't care what was in it, it's not covered LOL (but seriously, that's what it says).


----------



## malinois_16 (Aug 8, 2010)

I can answer that for you with two examples.

Last summer a 5 month old Shepherd mix puppy (who wasnt leashed) ran up to a dog aggressive black lab mix. The black lab mix was leashed. The lab mix broke the puppys leg causing $6,500 in damages. The owner of the Shepherd mix was going to sue but was advised against it because the judge wouldnt award them any money. Their dog wasnt leashed. Its their fault. 

I have a nasty shih tzu that keeps attacking Lincoln (sometimes she does get a bite in). I called my lawyer, the SPCA and the city and they said as long as Lincoln is leashed and the other dog is not any damages caused to either dog is the liability of the owner whos dog was not leashed. 

I asked this to make sure my arse was covered. I doubt Link would ever bite this little dog but accidents happens, dogs come out of know here etc. 

So if the Shepherd was even capable of attacking and caused damage had the lab mix been on a leash the attack never would of happened. So the fault would be on the owner of the dog who is not leashed. If both were leashed its 50/50...

Leash=control in Ontario at least.


----------



## Freestep (May 1, 2011)

Deathmetal said:


> Can I get a quick answer? What would have happened if the leashed dog bit the offleash dog, causing vet bills to the off leash dog?


Around here according to the leash law, whoever has their dog off-leash is at fault. So if an unleashed dog runs up to your leashed dog and gets hurt, you are not liable. Now, if you were in a leash-free zone, it could get a little stickier. We have a large municipal park where dogs are allowed off-leash but must be under "voice control". So if an unleashed dog ran up to your unleashed dog and did not obey its owner's recall, you probably wouldn't be liable then either. But it's hard to say as there can be many mitigating circumstances.

Of course, if you live in an area where your breed is banned, or required to wear a muzzle when in public and it isn't, all bets are off whether leashed or not.


----------



## ShenzisMom (Apr 27, 2010)

Thanks guys!


----------



## martemchik (Nov 23, 2010)

I believe that in most areas of the US you would have a very hard time recouping anything more than the original price of your dog since it is considered personal property. The example of the police dog is probably due to the fact that it was a police departement that might have wanted to keep the dog and just sweep the issue under the rug so to say. I have a feeling in the US it would be more of a who can afford the better lawyer to prove their side, no matter the amount of witnesses. Reading that leash law makes me believe they have a chance to win, but its questionable as to how much, usually you won't get anything for "emotional damages" as those are extremely hard to quantify as a dollar figure.

I don't really want to make assumptions about Canadian laws and court room practices, but I think you'd be hard pressed to find a lawyer in the United States that would take this kind of case and think he could win it.


----------



## kr16 (Apr 30, 2011)

Jax's Mom said:


> My policy tells me not to leave things in my car because they don't care what was in it, it's not covered LOL (but seriously, that's what it says).


wow, lmao, to funny, but to the point


----------



## Jax's Mom (Apr 2, 2010)

Even better, it also mentions that my home is a reverse black hole of danger. Since the car and the house are covered by the same insurer, the fact that the garage is under the house is safer but more of a risk all at once... the car is safe in that it's in the garage protected by the house but the house is also at risk of damaging the car if anything happens to said house. (they said all of this with a straight face). Since we have no-fault insurance in Ontario, meaning that the insurer will just cover its own policy holder no matter who was at fault, and settle with the offending party's insurance company and allegedly save money in litigation, so if I park my car in the garage under the house and something happens to the car, the insurance company will have to sue itself back and forth until it dies.
But if I chip my windsheld, it's covered. :happyboogie:


----------



## Caledon (Nov 10, 2008)

malinois_16 said:


> I can answer that for you with two examples.
> 
> Last summer a 5 month old Shepherd mix puppy (who wasnt leashed) ran up to a dog aggressive black lab mix. The black lab mix was leashed. The lab mix broke the puppys leg causing $6,500 in damages. The owner of the Shepherd mix was going to sue but was advised against it because the judge wouldnt award them any money. Their dog wasnt leashed. Its their fault.
> 
> ...


I'm in Ontario too, GTA, and animal control answered my question with a different answer than yours. They said "it depends" and would review each case on an individual basis, but it would weigh the fact that my dog was leashed and the other one was not. They told me if I am ever attacked by another dog, no matter how small the dog is that I should report it so it is on record. If enough people report the dog for the same behaviour, then it would make it easier to place responsibility and place fault.


----------



## Jax's Mom (Apr 2, 2010)

There are very few lawyers with a working knowledge of dog bite cases because they're so rare in Ontario... and even if the OSPCA or the city give any kind legal advice (which is illegal) over the phone, it means nothing. You have to find case law and decisions which the judge you're in front of will rely on. 
A police officer can tell you it's perfectly legal to walk around a schoolyard swinging a bag of hammers, but that doesn't mean their interpretation of the law will stick in court.


----------



## neiltus (Mar 10, 2011)

malinois_16 said:


> My friend called me to ask me a couple questions.
> 
> Her boyfriend has a German Shepherd, hes 7 years old and has the worst hips and knees. He is restricted to leash walking at a slow pace only.
> 
> ...


you really have some interesting posts. I think your friend should find a lawyer to recapture that 1K vet bill. Last attorney I hired was about 400 an hour. Your friend could end up getting 1k for the vet and owing the attorney 3K.



I am curious as to your age.


----------



## malinois_16 (Aug 8, 2010)

She found an attourny who only costs $200 an hour. Also, she will be going after for court fees as well and legal fees (lawyer fees). 

The case here where the Shepherd pup was mauled by the black lab. SEVERAL people including me wrote letters stating this dog has bitten SEVERAL times before. The owner KNOWS this black lab mix is SEVERELY dog aggressive. There were tons of letters from people who have been bitten by this dog, had their dogs bitten etc. 

Because the aggressive black lab was leashed....they laughed the case out the door. Its a pretty simple if your dog was leashed it never would of gotton attacked. Leashes are used for reasons, to control the dog. 

My age is non of your concern, but I wouldnt be surprised if I was older then you


----------



## Jax's Mom (Apr 2, 2010)

That's less than a legal aid lawyer makes (*makes*, not *bills*), I'd run... Especially if he calls himself an attorney, cuz we don't have those in Canada


----------



## malinois_16 (Aug 8, 2010)

Isnt a lawyer and attourny the same thing? The lawyer I used once when I needed one was $200 an hour with a $3,000 retainer fee. She was awesome and got everything dismissed.


----------



## Jack's Dad (Jun 7, 2011)

I don't know what the answer is to the situation in the OP. It's sad for the shepherd.

Most of the rest of the thread has been about legal action, attorneys etc...

If you start suing for everything that happens you will wind up with high insurance like here in the states. It can also lead to breed bans on home owners policies.

I'm not implying there aren't ever reasons for legal action but that there are consequences. When insurance companies pay settlements guess who pays later on.


----------



## neiltus (Mar 10, 2011)

The reason I ask your age is because of the subject matter of your various posts. You are right it is not my business. I doubt you are old enough to legally bring suit in your municipality.

I am sorry for your friends issues, regardless of the dogs history, I would not consider any legal challenge for this situation and would run like **** from any person who considers themselves an attorney or lawyer willing to sue over 1K. In my municipal area you would be subject to a court without representation.

A suit will do nothing to remove the aggressive dog. If the dog is truly aggressive, with all the instances you have documented and an irresponsible owner, the dog should be put to a rescue or put down.

I would contact animal control using a method of registered mail or some form of mail (don't know what you in the freeze line call it) explaining the situation and show a petition of people with past issues and ask for removal of the dog and a response from the city. IMO asking for money seems trivial-getting someone to pay for a dogs hip when it already had a bad hip falls into the "ID the amount of damages caused objectively". Asking you municipality to address a safety issue bc your afraid to your right to walk a leashed animal on the street, or a child on the street, well that is not trivial.


----------



## malinois_16 (Aug 8, 2010)

I am well over the drinking age in Canada and the US. . The vet bill is actually just over $3,000 now.


----------



## neiltus (Mar 10, 2011)

malinois_16 said:


> I am well over the drinking age in Canada and the US. . The vet bill is actually just over $3,000 now.


Without regards to your age, is your friend going to ask the vet for his money back if the dog is still lame after his treatment?


----------



## malinois_16 (Aug 8, 2010)

neiltus said:


> Without regards to your age, is your friend going to ask the vet for his money back if the dog is still lame after his treatment?


Why the **** would he ask the vet for his money back? It was the lab mix that caused the damage to the Shepherd. The Shepherd was walking fine until the lab threw his hips out of place. 

She called me today, her boyfriend has filed with the court.


----------



## neiltus (Mar 10, 2011)

malinois_16 said:


> Why the **** would he ask the vet for his money back? It was the lab mix that caused the damage to the Shepherd. The Shepherd was walking fine until the lab threw his hips out of place.
> 
> She called me today, her boyfriend has filed with the court.


You have the gall to suggest asking the vet back for flea meds...hence my comments on your friend asking for the vet's fees back. Sorry if I associated the repetition in your posts incorrectly.

http://www.germanshepherds.com/forum/basic-care/163007-i-am-furious-right-now-need-suggestions.html 

Just curious...It seems every reply that is made to this post warrants some further information that 'changed during the day' but was not mentioned in your other previous posts.

Then there is this thread...whatever happened to that lump...
http://www.germanshepherds.com/forum/health-issues/163135-lump-near-eye.html

I hope things work out for your friend...


----------



## malinois_16 (Aug 8, 2010)

You make no sense. No information has changed. Not sure why your asking about the lump and about the flea meds, I understood they were suppose to repel fleas, I since learned they work differently. 

Do you have nothing better to do then knock someone down? If you have nothing else to contribute to this thread, dont bother replying.


----------



## neiltus (Mar 10, 2011)

malinois_16 said:


> You make no sense. No information has changed. Not sure why your asking about the lump and about the flea meds, I understood they were suppose to repel fleas, I since learned they work differently.
> 
> Do you have nothing better to do then knock someone down? If you have nothing else to contribute to this thread, dont bother replying.


I am very sorry if you interpret my reply as an attempt to 'knock you down', or your friend down. I took time and offered advise to the best of my knowledge regarding your friend's situation. This upsets me that you find this to be an attack on your person.

The lump interested me, and I never heard how it resolved, or even if it did.

I guess I must have confused your posts and their timing since you mentioned after earlier posts that your friend called and said they had filed so quickly-I guess the situation changes that fast. I hope a peaceful and equitable solution can be reached for all parties.


----------



## neiltus (Mar 10, 2011)

And regardless of if you want to communicate with me do to my offending you, please keep us updated on this issue...stuff like this seems to effect a lot of people. I for one would like to know the outcome.


----------



## malinois_16 (Aug 8, 2010)

Just how you came across sounded rude. Asking about my age, saying I probably am not old enough to file legal claims in my city etc kinda came off as rude to me. 

The lump hasnt gone away, hasnt gotton bigger I am keeping an eye on it.

I am sorry if there was anything I took the wrong way. I guess with a couple people insulting me on the forum rather then let things go an me be a part of the forum I get defence really easy because I never know when the next attack will come


----------



## wyominggrandma (Jan 2, 2011)

The only issue I see is the fact that the GSD already had rear end issues. A good lawyer for the other side could get vet records on the GSD and try to make a plea that if this GSD wasn't in such bad physical shape, then a dog simply trying to "play" with it would not have hurt it. This lawyer could also try to show that excessive vet bills were made for long standing health issues on the GSD, including a wheel chair that is needed now but who is to say it wouldn't have happened tomorrow or the next day even without the off leash dog knocking the GSD down.
A judge might say that the GSD owner had a responsiblity to keep his dog out of situations that could get him hurt, hence walking on a public street where an accident could happen, even tripping over a hole in the ground, etc. 
Certainly the owners of the lab will be required to pay damages, but a judge may limit it to the original cost of the dog, and the amount of normal life it actually had as far as running, jumping and being an active 7 yr old dog and how much it lost due to the unleashed dog.But you might be surprised out just how much of the vet bill won't be recovered since this GSD already had known health issues that even a walk down the street could cause major problems if he fell or slipped. Now, if the dog had been totally healthy and no issues, then it might be a different scenerio, but a smart lawyer could set it up to look like your friend was not being careful enough about his dog's health going for a walk on a public street.
Hope it works out for your friends. Will be curious how it turns out.


----------



## malinois_16 (Aug 8, 2010)

In small claims court you actually dont need a lawyer. You go in, defend yourself, present the evidence. Its not criminal court. The people with the lab mix will not be able to afford a lawyer. 

I want to see how it turns out as well. They filed today and get their court date Friday and they have time to gather everything. They gave the labs owner a chance. 

They have right to walk there they want as dogs are expected to be leashed on public property. They dont guy by what ifs etc. They go by the law. Had the dog of been leashed, it wouldnt of damaged the shepherd who was leashed.


----------



## wyominggrandma (Jan 2, 2011)

I am well aware of how the law works and small claims. Handled many claims in court from my job.
I was just suggesting some scenerios that might happen depending on the judge, not that the off leash owners will not have to pay, but just things they might bring up. No, you don't have to have a lawyer, but many times in small claims court people bring lawyers for help.
Guess you have all the answers so why bother trying to reply. Sorry, it won't happen again.


----------



## malinois_16 (Aug 8, 2010)

No I am not saying to not reply . I was just trying to explain it by how *I* would interpret it. I mean if this happened to me...id be furious...my dog is my left hip. Nobody crosses him without crossing me lol


----------



## codmaster (Aug 5, 2009)

Maybe a solution to the vicious dog would be simply to carry a small stick (ax handle or big hammer handle) in case of the next attack. One good "Whack" and dog problem well on the way to being solved! Just a thought! Self defense.


----------



## TankGrrl66 (Jun 29, 2010)

I personally carry pepper spray and an unamused attitude when loose dogs run up to me. A polite but firm request for them to grab their dog NOW works. They see my two GSDs and they sprint over to get their dogs...

Anyway, while the fact that the attacked dog had prior injuries is a good point...the owners cannot be faulted for letting their dog outside. That is the part I disagree on. There is no ordinance for weak dogs to not leave the owners property. But a lawyer on the other side could really be...a lawyer, lol. What was meant OP was to make sure your friend is prepared for a sleazy rebuttal. It should really just stay in small claims and you get your vet bills back. 

What if there was a toddler with a shoulder sprain and the lab mix ran up to say HI!!!!! and popped the arm out of socket or broke it? Would that same 'well, it was hurt before' thing apply then? I'm not asking to be a smart but I am actually wondering about it! Anybody have an idea?


----------



## KZoppa (Aug 14, 2010)

TankGrrl66 said:


> I personally carry pepper spray and an unamused attitude when loose dogs run up to me. A polite but firm request for them to grab their dog NOW works. They see my two GSDs and they sprint over to get their dogs...
> 
> Anyway, while the fact that the attacked dog had prior injuries is a good point...the owners cannot be faulted for letting their dog outside. That is the part I disagree on. There is no ordinance for weak dogs to not leave the owners property. But a lawyer on the other side could really be...a lawyer, lol. What was meant OP was to make sure your friend is prepared for a sleazy rebuttal. It should really just stay in small claims and you get your vet bills back.
> 
> What if there was a toddler with a shoulder sprain and the lab mix ran up to say HI!!!!! and popped the arm out of socket or broke it? Would that same 'well, it was hurt before' thing apply then? I'm not asking to be a smart but I am actually wondering about it! Anybody have an idea?


 
i know here in the states if an injury is made worse by the action of someone else, say you sprained your ankle, have it documented on your medical record, and then get into a car accident because some idiot ran a red light and smashes your car up bad enough you manage to break the same sprained ankle and sustain other injuries as a result, the same idea does not apply. The injury has then been made worse and recovery more difficult, time consuming and possibly painful if the bones arent set right from the start needing a rebreak. Aggravating an injury further as a result of someone's carelessness. A Lawyer could come in and say"hey well they already have it shown on their medical record the were already suffering a sprained ankle, this injury isnt really to be blamed on the other guy" and the other lawyer could point out the the accident resulted in the further care necessary, possible time lost from work for recovery, etc. make sense? If an injury is aggravated, documented, and made worse from something else, it can be used against the party who is to blame aka the guy who ran the red light so to speak.


----------



## martemchik (Nov 23, 2010)

Its clear that the judicial system works differently in Canada then it does in the US. First in the US it is almost impossible to sue for damages and "legal fees." Since it is your choice to go into litigation. Second, I'm just very much in doubt that any normal attorney would take on such a case since there are so many question marks about the whole thing and it has to do with dogs, which are property under US law so therefore would fall under the "make whole" principle and we go back to the fix or replace, whatever is cheaper.

Your statement of "they can't afford a lawyer" is a poor assumption though. If you are being sued for $3000+ in a case with so many questions, you can afford to pay a lawyer up to that amount and you still win out in the end.

And a response to tankgirl...anytime people are involved its a different story and we all know that. No matter what the dog was doing at the moment and how nice of a dog it is the liability would lie with the owner of the dog. As much as we all think a dog is part of our family and as close to us as a child, for the rest of the world, they are just dogs and humans hold a much higher standing.


----------



## Jax's Mom (Apr 2, 2010)

Eggshell skull - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
...not sure why Canadian case law isn't mentioned here, but there is plenty of that here.


----------



## GSDolch (May 15, 2006)

Well, all I can say is good luck! Lots of people making lots of assumptions on how it works. But, it varies in the states, depending on where you live and even down to the judge you get and how he wants to look at it. 

Most places in the states, if someone is ordered to pay a large amount of money, then they can set up a payment plan with the court and pay the court who pays the people owed. So even if someone couldn't afford a lawyer they could still afford to pay so long as they have a job


----------



## malinois_16 (Aug 8, 2010)

The owners of the lab mix cannot afford a lawyer. The owner of the Shepherd who is suing can. 

In fact, when the lab mix consulted with a lawyer (many offer free consults) the lawyer reviewed the case, reviewed witness statements and basically told the guy to pay 3/4 and walk away, because if it goes to court the judge will grant everything. The dog has a right to be walking on leash on public property. The lab does as well, but the lab was not leashed and had it of been (this isnt the first time the lab has been off leash and issued a ticket etc) so its not like the owners can argue they didnt know it was the law and apparently this dog has a bite on record from a previous incident where he nipped a kid while off leash. 

In the consult the lawyer suggested he try to work this out now, because if it goes to court the judge could nail him. He said since your dog was off leash, he has less then 20% to convince a judge to award him nothing. The Shepherds owner was following the laws, the labs owner was not. 

My friends boyfriends lawyer he spoke to (his friend, who cant help from conflict of interest) heard this from the lawyer the lab owner spoke to. Said briefly what happened (as consults arent privlidged). So the lab owner came out and offered to pay 1/4 of the bill. He denied and said he would let a judge decide. 

He will be held liable for lawyer and legal fees as well since he wouldnt of inquired them if the lab was leashed. It may not even get past mediation, the lab owner may cave and say okay just to stay out of the court system because his dogs in the system for priors...


----------



## doggiedad (Dec 2, 2007)

they could ask them or tell them
what it's costing in Vet bills including
the chair. if they refuse to pay sue them
for the Vet bills, the chair, plus.


----------



## ValleyGirl (Dec 31, 2010)

Haven't read all the responses so maybe this has been said. But before you go to an attorney, check to see if your city/county has small claims court. Usually these courts allow you to persue damages up to a certain maximum and you do not have to have an attorney. Just pay a filing fee and fill out forms. An attorney would be expensive if you could get one to take so small a case to start with. Good luck.


----------



## malinois_16 (Aug 8, 2010)

Small Claims court has already been filed. They are going to do mediation first to see if the lab owners will wake up


----------



## prudence12 (Jul 25, 2011)

DharmasMom said:


> Wow. That is ridiculous. So someone can totally screw up your dog's life and cause a HUGE hardship to your life both emotionally, financially and even physically and completely walk away. You should at least be able to punch them then or something.


Yeah... Maybe they're really sorry and it wasn't intentional but at least they should have apologized.


----------

