Friday, May 2, 2008

Donate to
Please donate to support our work is a 501(c)(3) tax-exempt public charity organization. Learn more »

posted by   |  permalink  |  6 comments  | email  |icon blog rss  |icon comment rss 

Post a Comment

The comment policy.


Anonymous Anonymous  |  5/02/2008 5:14 AM  |  Flag  
In most places, the law only allows to recoup the cost of the dog....However a few pit owners have received six figure judgements against police departments for wrongful shooting of their dogs.

It would seem that when an individual brings a dog bred for killing other dogs into a neighborhood, they have made a conscious decision to put the neighborhood dogs under a cloud of actuarial risk. I don't see why the law doesn't allow for punitive damages. Also, why doesn't animal cruelty charges apply here?

This was as intentional as a drunk driver getting behind the wheel of a car.

Anonymous IC Red, Then Green  |  5/02/2008 1:48 PM  |  Flag  
Excellent point, anonymous! Your mention of this sent me on a search to explore litigation history. I found several examples where settlements for pit bull deaths exceeded 200K. Pit bull owners have set the bar for a pet's value and they should be held to that standard in future litigation.

The biggest challenge to meet or exceed this standard is the probability that any pit bull defendant will be poor, uninsured or underinsured, especially since many pit bull owners are either uneducated, unemployed, underemployed, or of nefarious or fugitive status. For those rare few beyond this condition, let the gavel fall.

Anonymous David  |  5/03/2008 5:31 AM  |  Flag  
I was wondering if this amount was ever paid (200k), awarded and paid are two different things. I know in most stated pets are concidered property and you can not get more than their value if a pit bull kills your pet, so how do they get more if a cop kills a pit bull. It would seem like this is something that would be overturned on appeal.

Anonymous Anonymous  |  5/04/2008 4:05 AM  |  Flag  
With so many explosively dog aggressive Pits being adopted out by the Animal Welfare organizations, it would seem reasonable that they share liability when a "sweetie" they placed rips a neighborhood pet apart.

Many of these Animal Welfare Organizations are sitting on $millions of tax-free donations...I'm surprised the Lawyers haven't found a way to get to it.

Additionally, the same liability trail should apply to breeders who sell "dangerous product".

Anonymous Anonymous  |  5/04/2008 4:44 AM  |  Flag  
Breeders with liability, are you kidding me? Get a load of some top pit bull breeders (the list is huge, I've only supplied a few):

Tom Garner Kennels
Bolio Line Advertised
Recognize a Pro Athlete?
A Convention of Pit Bulls and Pro Athletes
50 Cents Rap Star Bought Pits Here, Check Out the Client List
Scary Fighting Dogs from Sorrells Kennels

These links, quickly grabbed from Google, isn't it fair to say that the very reason BSL is highly litigated is so that folks of this nature can continue their unmonitored practices? (and untaxed too?)

Anonymous Anonymous  |  5/06/2008 6:16 AM  |  Flag  
Yes...but take for instance the mass euthanization from the "Bolio Line" breeding operation out in Arizona last week.... These folks were highly regarded top Pit Bull breeders and leaders within the American Dog Breeders Association registry. Yet, despite being "Dog Professionals", somewhere in the neighborhood of 90 percent of their breeding stock were evaluated as unadoptable!

These folks shipped dangerous product all over the country for decades with zero liability.

Post a Comment »