Here's the situation:
A 3 month old dog was just adopted at the shelter over the weekend. The dog was on a leash and walking to the owner's mailbox in an apartment complex. A mother and her approximately 5 year old child approached their nearby mailbox. The child excitedly proclaimed "a doggy!" and left the mother to touch the dog, where the dog excitedly jumped up and knocked the child to the ground. No attack was made and the child did not suffer any injuries, aside from being scared. The mother freaked out and blamed the dog owner for harming her child.
Who was wrong here? The dog was on a leash and the child came to the dog, so I think the dog owner did nothing wrong, but I'm not familiar with these cases. If the mother decided to sue, would she have any sort of case?
This.
If the child was hurt, then I'll defer to someone else but would question how it would hold up in a court of law.
When I walk my dog I keep a fairy taught leash when people are near by. That couldn't have happened if the child had approach my dog while I was walking him. I would have had him tight to my side by that point.
That said the mother sounds over reactionary IMO, and should have just dusted the boy off, maybe make a small mention of keeping tighter control of the animal and moved on.
This.
No. Based on the facts as laid out above, there is no unreasonable behavior by the dog owner, let alone unreasonable behavior from which harm to another was reasonably foreseeable.
Moreover, even if there was some sort of culpable negligence on the part of the dog owner, the woman and her child assumed the risk of harm by approaching the dog, and potentially were contributorily negligent.
Finally, even if the woman were to sue and somehow establish liability, there would be no damages whatsoever. No injury, no damages.
So, no case.
Just the child approached the dog.
Thanks to everyone who replied. I really appreciate you taking the time to help.
It shouldn't change the analysis ultimately, as there was no harm here. So, even if this was in a strict liability state, the dog's owner would be liable for... nothing.
Link - ( New Window )
I had to read that a couple of times to figure out what you meant ...
I had to read that a couple of times to figure out what you meant ...
LOL, between my horrible typing and auto correct you never know what I might let loose with.
Good thumbs?