Okay, some of you may remember the thread from a couple of years ago, almost to the month, when my 3 year old daughter was bitten by a dog at a house we were actually looking to buy. The owner failed to put the blue healer (large dog) away and let it roam the house while my family walked room-to-room in the company of the owner. My daughter, having never met a mean dog in her life, was bitten on the face, endured several punctures, bled profusely.. had to have minor corrective plastic surgery at age three with possible follow up later in life.... The dog's owner at the time was overly cooperative, had their insurance company handle a full investigation - there was in fact a full report at the animal control, etc... hospital bills were covered, etc... Over the course of the last two years, the insurance has drug the settlement out... the plastic surgeon gave all the docs to the courts, the animal control, police etc... We agreed to a settlement (low I might add in my mind, but I was trying to get this chapter behind us). It was reviewed and agreed on by the insurance company, etc.. Now come the dog owner and his wife trying to counter sue us for the court costs, denying it even happened... WHOA!! WHAT? Trying to take the money away from my daughter that your dog bit? And we settled for less than we could have, trying to be civil and move on in life?? I need a dog bite lawyer. I'm extremely boiling upset mad. How dare someone deny what I have on record, in pictures, and try to counter sue!!!!!!
I was bitten/scratched by an English sheepdog when I was 3, was in the hospital in michigan for a couple days. I had plastic surgery to revise the scar on my face when I was 13. I started seeing the settlement money when I was 18. My dad always says that he could've gotten more for me had this happened in Texas, but alas it didn't and I didn't even know about the money until I got the first payment. Anyways...I don't really have a response to the question, just that the same thing happened to me when I was 3. Good luck with everything IROC.
Thanks for the insensitive replies, buttholes. I'm talking about my real, live, flesh and blood daughter... not some overpaid NFL -spoiled thug that just found God when cornered for doing some insanely cruel things... which by the way, I am inclined to give a chance to redeem himself since he has apologized and will be doing time... On the other hand, thanks for the sympathy, finalsbound. Any lawyer ideas from the legal eagles on the board? Maybe a recommendation of someone you know, or know of?
Even if you have Lionel Hutz as your lawyer, I don't think and I really don't want them to win. How dare they--on top of letting everything drag out--attempt to get more money from you? Someone must have tipped them off about something they thought they could get back. I do not know how it works by the book, but I would suppose that people who sue for COURT COSTS only sue because of defamation or because they wasted their time with something that didn't have to take place. I don't see them winning at all, and I would hate for them to win at all. I hope you don't even have to go to court, IROCman.
that's horrible, get the best lawyer you can and destroy those assholes. they can get money the honest way instead of the bullsh!t way. I really wish I could recommend a lawyer to you but I know of none
Actually, I remember from law classes in college that an owner is not liable for a dogbite if it never behaved that way before. ie. "First bite - no foul." He may have heard about this and is now trying to reneg on payment. Not sure if the law has changed, but as of 96, the owner wouldn't have been liable if the dog hadn't bit anyone previously.
They used "title 92" or something to make their stand... maybe article 92.... Anyone familiar? The thing I don't get is that we accepted the insurance company's offer. The insurance co. was supposed to be the only people we dealt with, they had a neutral, state-appointed legal firm making the offer. If they didn't want to settle it amicably, why make the offer? She wouldn't get the money until 18, and then a little bit more at 21... so it's not like it's for us... shoot, I'll just tell you it's under 15 grand! The main issue is that they have no right to keep her from determining for herself, when she's grown, whether or not to have a surgery... she may not choose to do so, but how does anyone know that? Current costs alone for just ONE revision was priced at 3k-5k by more than one doctor... and she has FOUR puncture scars, three of which are easily seen if you look at her for more than 2 seconds... the main one shows up when she smiles or frowns... it could be the most costly according to the doctor as well... -so the offer involved placing the funds into a mutual fund so that it can accrue interest until she decides to use it, untouchable until 18, and so on. Here's part of the rub though... the doc said she may need a revision around age 12 to 15... so what then? It'll just be out of pocket. Why? Because the dog bit my child as she walked past the dog's bed with one hand in my wife's hand! I couldn't get there.. my wife WAS right there and couldn't stop it... the owner was right within 5 feet and couldn't stop it - AHHHHHH, but she could have by just locking up the dog upon our arrival!! It happened fast, yes... but it did not have to, and it was most certainly not provoked. As to her condition now?? She still talks about the "mean dog" about once every two weeks with absolutely ZERO provocation. Still calls out the owner's name... goes through the story, etc. And at times she still has nightmares about it getting her. This wakes the house... and so on. I want this chapter behind us. As of now I'm just very upset about this counter suit asking that the judge hold them not liable, asking us to prove it even happened again, and asking the judge to rule for them and award them all the court costs payable by US! What nerve?!!?! Currently my daughter goes through it all again every time she hears the dog owners name (like on TV, or from a friend) used... it's a common name that is said quite a bit. So far all they've suffered is having the dog locked up for 10 days... How can they deny police reports, hospital records, doctor records, photos, insurance photos, etc? They've also since moved to Alabama and the policy they had is for a property they no longer own... but the insurance offered a settlement!! They could have just let it go... but they choose to insult us?! Man at times I wonder what I would do if I were them... but then I realize I'm not in that class of jerks... I can be a jerk, but not to someone else's kid's right to have corrective surgery for an incident that I should have been responsible enough to prevent. It's common sense. I KNEW I should have filed for a civil suit earlier. Quite frankly my son, my wife and I personally have had some pretty harsh issues dealing with this. We've all experienced nightmares and had our angered moments, etc. We 3 have mutually shared the sad realization that while we stood within literal inches of the exact spot the attack took place, we were helpless to stop it. And I'm sorry, but the "my dog's never shown any violent tendencies" line is NOT suitable for me. The "first bite - no foul" crap is pure male bovine fecal excrement. Know your dog's breed people.. a basic cattle dog can be mean, especially if for some reason thinks it's territory is a t risk... and this dog was old, and older dog's get grumpy... Did we know this before we saw the dog? No. Should the burden be on other people to know my dog? No. The burden of knowing your pet is on you. Maybe I'll call the TEXAS HAMMER... Unless someone here can recommend a direct contact. Sorry I'm venting so much.
i cease to be amazed at the audacity of some people. they should be punished for bringing up such outrageous claims after losing the case (mental pain and suffering... or something).
I want to preface this by saying I am not a lawyer and this is not professional legal advice. Unfortunately for you, dog bite laws vary by state, and in many states, people are not liable for a dog bite from a dog that has not shown violent tendencies. From Moore v. McKay (see Moore v. McKay, Tex.Civ.App., 55 S.W.2d 865)we are told, "At common law, the owner of a dog is not liable for injuries caused by it, unless it is vicious and notice of that fact is brought home to him." So, absent some prior knowledge of the dogs vicious tendencies, they would not be liable. Given that they have already settled with you, I don't know how strong their case will be to recover that money though.
hey IROC it, i know a plaintiff's attorney, and i'm actually going to be seeing him in about an hour. email me at ntaqvi@gmail.com with your name and number, and any other pertinent information, and i'll have him call you up to possibly arrange a meeting. he works at Abraham Watkins (abrahamwatkins.com), one of the longest-standing and most prestigious Plaintiff firms in the nation. -Naaz
I don't get it. You settled out of court on the initial attack...I assume this couple signed something stating they were making payment or amends, etc. How can they now deny the whole thing? It doesn't seem like the court should even allow a counter-suit like this when the whole process has already played out. My sympathies for you and your daughter, IROC It.
