John Meihaus Jr. says he was only acting in self-defense when a
neighbor's miniature pinscher ran onto his property and began barking at
him. Meihaus grabbed a baseball bat and used it to "guide" the
12-inch-tall, 15-pound dog back onto David and Joyce Plotnik's property.
Neither the jury nor the appellate court bought that argument. Law.com has the story...
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
2 comments:
As the plaintiffs' trial attorney in this case, please be advised that the family values their privacy and will not be commenting at this time. My own personal thoughts revolve around the fact that the relationship between a family and their dog can be very special and very unique. Most of us will acknowledge that there is no other domestic animal to which a person can become so attached. Harm or death to the family dog, especially at the hands of another person, will understandably be keenly felt. Under the appropriate facts and circumstances, someone intentionally setting out to cause such harm can now be held fully accountable for the injuries and damages to both the dog and its owners. I'm very comfortable with this decision and am glad for the family.
http://jacksonandwilson.com/appellate-law-dog-owner-rights/
We've blogged about this topic as well! Feel free to share to your community... it is quite interesting! http://blogs.lawyers.com/2012/09/pet-owners-can-sue-for-emotional-distress/
Post a Comment