My mother-in-law has two pomeranians who she refuses to leash. Yesterday she decided to walk her dogs and one of her dogs ran into the middle of the street and was killed by a driver who never stopped. My mother-in-law was devasted, but was able to get the drivers plates. She feels she can bring legal action against this person. I told her she can't, because the dog was without a leash. Needless to say she will not listen to me. I don't believe she has any legal grounds to sue this person. I believe she was the negligent one and had she leashed her dog it would never have happened. I just feel she is fighting a lost cause. I do think it is sad the driver never stopped. I just believe nothing can be done am I wrong?
2007-01-03 06:12:43 · 22 answers · asked by redheaded GINGER 1 in Pets ➔ Dogs
She did get the drivers plates
2007-01-03 06:16:13 · update #1
She has no grounds to sue. The driver can be charged with leaving the scene of an accident, that is all. If there was damage to the vehicle, they can sue HER, because she was negligent in allowing the dog on the road.
2007-01-03 06:16:23 · answer #1 · answered by DaBasset - BYBs kill dogs 7 · 5⤊ 0⤋
There really is no valid argument on your mothers behalf. Your mother would be seen as a negligent dog owner and in some states breaking the law, because some states do require your dog to be leashed when it is outside. Your mother definately does not want to go to court appearing as a person breaking the law of the state or city ordineces in which they live. I know in Masschasuetts if they catch your dog without a leash they can fine you and/or take your dog in.
The person can come up with a number of things such as the dog was to small to see, the dog ran between the wheels, etc. Since they did not break the law in any way your mother will loose and the defendent will win and/or the case can simply be dismissed. Good Luck.
2007-01-03 06:56:09 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 1⤋
Actually, if the dog had caused damage to the person's car (had it been a larger dog), she would be legally responsible to have it repaired.
So many times when someone hits a dog ,they feel guilty & offer to pay any vet bills - we always saw this at the vets. But, in truth, the owner of the dog was (by legal definition) negligent, had violated leash laws, and as the dog is their 'property', were responsible for any damage it caused to the vehicle. Also, if the driver sued for mental trauma suffered, they would very likely win.
I surely hope you mom-in-law learns something from this & puts a leash on her remaining dog!
2007-01-03 07:35:35 · answer #3 · answered by mustanglynnie 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I can answer this from experience. I ran over a small dog in the road on my way to pick up my kids from school a few years ago and didn't stop, didn't have time. A week later I got a summons to appear in court, I thought this was so rediculous I went without an attorney. The dogs owner got on the stand and told what happened, actually told the truth. Her dog ran out in the road and I hit the dog and continued without stopping.
The judge asked how fast I was going she said about 35, that was the speed limit. The judge then asked why she was suing over a dog. She said "that dog was my life, was my baby".
The judge asked if she had children and she said no. The judge then said that was a good thing, anyone that allows their "baby" to wonder into the road unsupervised did not need to have children. He then asked me if their was any damage to my vehicle, I said no, he said "case dismissed."
Gave me the impression she would have had to pay for any damages to my truck.
I may could have counter-sued for missing a day of work, not sure.
2007-01-03 07:19:30 · answer #4 · answered by e.sillery 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
it is unfortunate about your mother-in-laws dog, but she has to realise there are leash laws and she is not immune. if she goes to the police with the licence plate she'd basically be turning herself in and would be charged a fine. i live in a rural area, no leash laws, very few cars come by my house, but i still have my dog's leash and collar on every time we leave. i've been through the loss of pets before. it's sad. but she should learn from this and whether there's a leash law there or not, she should, for her's, the dogs and the publics safety, put the dog on a leash no matter how little the dog is.
2007-01-03 06:37:32 · answer #5 · answered by python_hydra 1 · 0⤊ 0⤋
You're right, she probably would be considered negligent. Before she goes about this, make sure that there are no laws requiring dogs to be on a leash or she is basically turning herself in and could get a fine. If she could prove that the driver was under the influence then maybe, but I'm sure it's too late for that. I am very sad that she had to go through this but it could have easily been prevented. I hope that she keeps her dog on a leash from now on. The driver is a jerk for not stopping.
2007-01-03 06:21:12 · answer #6 · answered by Summer 5 · 2⤊ 2⤋
It could go either way. I've heard of a lot of cases where this exact thing happened and the dog owner won. It all depends on the judge.
She may not be granted any money from the person because she didn't use a leash but the person driving the car may still be punished for not stopping after hitting the dog.
I'm sorry this happened to the innocent dog. I hope your mom decides to use a leash from now on. It's very sad to know that so many people out there will hit an animal and think nothing of it.
2007-01-03 06:24:21 · answer #7 · answered by Positively Pink 5 · 2⤊ 2⤋
If she attempts to, it can go very bad for her.
First, since there is a leash law, it is very possible that she could get fined for not having the dog on a leash.
Second, if the dog did any damage to the car that hit it, she is responsible for the cost of those damages because she was breaking the law.
Third, they could possibly take her other dog away if she admits that she regularly walks him with out a leash near the road. It may be (and I understand this is a stretch) considered animal neglect. Her behavior caused the first dog to died, it may be seen that her continuing behavior would but the other one at risk too.
2007-01-03 06:48:12 · answer #8 · answered by Katslookup - a Fostering Fool! 6 · 0⤊ 1⤋
She would be VERY lucky if she was not countersued for car damage, or emotional distress or something else. No one but her is at falut. It is NOT illegal to not stop after hitting an animal. It might be immoral, but not illegal.
Gee, maybe I am a bad person, but if someone was walking their dog OFF LEASH and it ran out and I hit it.....I would NOT be giving the idiot ANY money! NONE. Why would anyone reward some idiot for their bad behavior that cost a dog its life????? And that is like taking the blame. WOULD NOT HEPPEN HERE!!!
And your mother-in-law ahould not sit there feeling like a victim!! She should feel like a totaly loser who was at fault in the death of her dog!!!!!!!!!!
People are amazing. If she was walking a off leash pitbull, and it attacked a child walking down the road, she would be TOTALLY to blame. No questions asked!! But if she is walking a little mop, and has it off leash, and it goes in the road.....someone else is to balme. Where is the logic?? How about some personal responsibility????
2007-01-03 06:16:42 · answer #9 · answered by ARE YOUR NEWFS GELLIN'? 7 · 3⤊ 0⤋
She is wrong, we have leash laws and she did not have the dog on a leash, if the dog had done any damage to the car she could have been fined and made to pay the damages, also if she peruses this she may find herself fined for not having him on a leash
2007-01-03 15:37:55 · answer #10 · answered by Scooter 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋