In Maryland, Mrs. Allison cannot allege strict liability for damages incurred to her daughter by the Huffs’ boxer dog, Stella. To allege strict liability, an owner must take responsibility for the actions of their dog but only if the owner knew of the dog’s propensity to harm mankind. See Slack v. Villari, 476 A.2d 227, 232 (Md. Ct. Spec. App. 1984). The issue pertains to whether or not the Huffs knew about Stella’s potential to attack mankind. If Mr. and Mrs. Huff knew of Stella’s dangerous behavior, Mrs. Allison can allege for damages and successfully win in court. However, it is unlikely. Although Stella bit Danielle Allison, the evidence indicates that the Huffs had no prior knowledge to reasonably foresee Stella’s attack. Their knowledge …show more content…
Hamilton, 219 A.2d at 787. First, the owner’s knowledge primarily relies on past violent or aggressive occurrences or behavior, such as an attack or mauling. See id. The knowledge can also be inferred from the purpose of the dog’s presence in the household. Benton, 489 A.2d at 551. Second, their treatment of the dog portrays the intended purpose; such as which people are able to approach the dog, and the amount of time and opportunities that the dog can freely wander without supervision. Finally, the owners may infer if the dog is dangerous based on the dog’s training. Slack, 476 A.2d at 234. If the owners trained the dog, they may believe that the dog’s obedience deters future attacks, as the owners have a sense of control over the dog. Therefore, the owners believe that the dog cannot harm another person because of their control. Overall, the elements in dispute are whether the Huffs knew of Stella’s vicious propensities based on past violent occurrences with mankind, the purpose of Stella as a family pet, and the Huffs trust in their control over …show more content…
In Hamilton, three dogs near-fatally attacked nine-year-old Donald Smith. Hamilton v. Smith, 219 A.2d 783, 784 (Md. Ct. Spec. App. 1996). The Smiths were tenants of the Hamiltons’ property, and Mr. Hamilton would leave his dogs unchained as to guard the property during the nights. Id. The Hamilton’s knew about the dogs’ violent behavior; they attacked and mauled visitors to the property in past occassions. See id. However, they continued to allow the dogs to guard the property unsupervised. Id. at 785. The previous attacks occurred as soon as five days before the incident with Donald. See id. at 784, 785. These incidents included an attack and mauling on a motorist, whom Hamilton took to the hospital himself, Hamilton, 219 A.2d at 785, as well as an attack on an employee of the Hamiltons, Id. at 786. Mr. Smith, Donald’s father, previously worked for the Hamilton’s as well, and testified that the Hamilton’s chained up one of the dogs as the result of the dog lunging at any person who approached, other than the Hamiltons. Id. at 785. The court held that the owners had knowledge of the dogs’ violent behavior, yet continued to keep the dogs. Id. at 787-88. It reasoned that the multiple attacks provided clear and convincing evidence that the dogs
On 10/15/17, at approximately 11:05am, I Deputy Warden N. Christian with Franklin County Animal Care and Control (FCACC) was dispatched to 2269 Summit St on a dog being held. I arrived at the location at approximately 12:21pm, I spoke to the complainant who stated he saw the dog running loose in the general area. The complainant was scared the pit bull (tan/wht) would run into the street. I had the complainant complete a animal release form. I placed the pit bull in my vehicle.
Based on the facts of the case and the process of the case reaching the Supreme Court. The blog written by Lyle Denniston stated that the Florida Supreme Court agreed that sending a dog onto the porch of someone private home, to sniff at the door, was considered a search and applied the Fourth Amendment. Even though, the Miami-Dade did not verify the trustworthy of the tip and did not receive a warrant to search the property in the initial stage of the case. Franky, a trained police working dog, detect marijuana. He was trained to sit down if there were drugs, marijuana, in this case in the area.
On 8/5/15 worker visited the residence of Ms. Mona Watts, for the purpose of assessing her need for services and making first victim contact. Upon entering, the home worker noticed what appeared to be sewage under the trailer beside the steps. The home smelt like the powder off a dog flea and tick collar. There as a dog in the home and according to Ms. Watts, the dog is elderly and unable to use the bathroom outside and that was the reason there was dog urine and feces in the floor. the dog did not appear to be an elderly dog.
I. Question Presented Under Florida Law, did Jessie Veyas recklessly discharge a firearm or commit animal cruelty, due to the claims that she was in an altered level of consciousness and that she acted in self defense? II. Brief Answer Yes.
To: Attorney Toscano From: Natasha Jagdeo Date: 21 April 2017 Re: Woods v. Walker Case No. 2017-CA-004592-O Internal Memorandum Facts: This memo is regarding the dog bite case against Luke Woods. Our client, Karen Walker is the owner of a 4 (four) year old pug named Bean, who weighs approximately ten (10) pounds.
Breed selection legislation (BSL) is the regulation or banning of specific breeds of dogs in attempt to reduce canine attacks, and has become one of the biggest matters of disagreement regarding animal ownership. In Flanagin’s article “The Tragedy of America’s Dog: A brief history of the vilification of the pit bull,” the author successfully argues that the pit bull, one of the main breeds discriminated against by BSL, is unrightfully blamed for an uninformed and irresponsible people. Flanagin attempts to reach the reader by using the breed’s shifting reputation, as well as the misleading facts, to show how society has been deceived into believing that the dog is to blame. Flanagin writes for the Pacific Standard, a magazine that focuses on
At every beach that the two of then went to there were signs saying no dogs, but eventually John found a part of the beach which in fact actually allowed dogs. John learned his lessons from previous times and kept Marley on a leash so that he would not run away and destroy everything. After having a good day on the beach and not having any problems, John thought that it would be a good idea to take off the leash which was a good idea at first but eventually it was a bad idea. But all of a sudden, it looked like Marley was about to go to the bathroom and leave his droppings, when a women caught the attention of John and what Marley was about to do and after that fiasco, Marley and John were not allowed to go on the beach ever
People can change the dog to feel a certain way about a person. The advancements in technology have also made the people extremely reliant on those advancements. People do not go out and track down people if they broke the law. They can use the lava hounds to track them down for them. This is a form of physical control the government has.
The case of Florida versus Jardines was heard before the Supreme Court on October 31, 2012 and a decision was made on March 26, 2013. The Supreme Court ruled in favor of Jardines. This case challenged the fundamental core of the Fourth Amendment, which protects against unreasonable search and seizure. The ruling of this case has impacted how law officials handle searches and the use of drug dogs. This case also challenged the boundary line of where personal property starts.
Now there are rules at a dog park even though you can take your dog off their leash in most dog parks. But in some areas you have to have a permit to be able to let your dog off their leash and provide it if asked, which most do not or don 't bring the permit. One of the many rules that arent enforced onto dog owners at dog parks, and normal things that can 't be stopped such as when a dog attacks another dog or a complete stranger it 's an action that will eventually
Tension, lies, fights, truth, and love all play a role in the development of this story. Stella’s relationships with Stanley and
Have you ever been bit by a dog and thought it was mean? Come to find out, it is very possible it’s not mean at all. Many facts show that dogs bite in many different scenarios. It’s not that they are mean, it could be how they were raised, them feeling threatened, or even low tolerance. There are many statements that prove that the dogs should not be executed for biting someone when it could possibly be our fault as a owner.
However, in cases of blatant trespassing or intentional provoking of the animal, the injured person is considered partly or totally responsible for the cause of their injury. Minnesota dog bite law states that if a dog attacks without provocation the owner is liable for damages to the person injured
These animals should be taken to animal shelters and taken away from the people who beat them and make them fight. If you ever see a dog walking on the side of the road and it looks like its malnurited then you should do it a favor and take
Before I could order anything, the girl at the cash register had to call my attention twice before I stopped staring at their “Family Photo”, a framed collection of the café dogs’ pictures, with their names and breeds printed each portrait. Most of the dogs were bright-eyed and panting, their tongue lolling out in eagerness. They all looked right into the camera; as if they knew that their adorable puppy eyes and pent-up energy would translate easily into the picture and make anyone perk up in the anticipation of having a chance to play with them. That’s definitely how it worked for me and my groupmates. We absentmindedly paid for our tickets to the Dog Area as a thousand images of how the experience was going to go formed in my head, further kindling my excitement.