Jump to content
Dogomania

My dog was brutally attacked and killed by another dog.


Guest Anonymous

Recommended Posts

Guest Anonymous

My dog was attack by a pit bull a few doors up the street from where I live. My dog was a miniture poodle, very expensive and my best friend. Frankly I've never been so heart sick.

No apology, no contact, nothing but silence from the neighbor. I reported the incident to animal control and they paid the owner a visit. Personally I don't think much will happen.

Certainly there must be a negligence problem here and I must have some claim on my loss.

Am I wrong in assuming that?

Thanks for any help someone could be.
Sam

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 69
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

I am unsure as to whether the Poodle was attacked up the street away from home, or if the other dog was FROM up the street, but wandered into your yard. That would make a difference.

To be honest, I could see the validity of pointing out a dog's monetary value. Hear me out before stoning me to death. Since dogs are still considered "property" and thus have no rights of their own, you really can't claim trauma, emotional stress, or any of that on the loss or injury of a dog, though it is usually extremely traumatic to lose a furry companion. However, being "property," dogs can have a monetary value attached to them. If it serves nothing else, at least it could dig into the pockets of other, more irresponsible owners and inspire them to be more responsible. So even though you couldn't effectively charge someone for the trauma they caused through their own negligence or indifference, perhaps they can be penalized by paying for a "valuable" dog (though we all know that the value of a dog is their love and companionship). In the end, it still might just be the thing to motivate someone to behave more responsibly in the future.

Then again, these are just my perceptions. I have no idea how Judge Judy would rule on it. :oops:

Sorry about the loss of your dog.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Judge Wopner always gave them the monetary value of the dog but said legally he couldn't give pain and suffering for a dog. I assume that would also be for the pain of losing a dog.

I must admit I am a bit taken aback by you mentioning the monetary value of your dog first also. I think what makes a difference is not the location but whether there is a leash law and if your dog was off leash and so was the other dog in that case you are responsible 50/50. If the other dog was off leash and as horse feathers said your dog wandered into the other dog's yard then it's all your fault and finally if the other dog wandered into your yard then the owner of the other dog is at fault. I watch enough court t.v. to figure out how it would come out.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Anonymous

[quote name='Sam']My dog was attack by a pit bull a few doors up the street from where I live. My dog was a miniture poodle, very expensive and my best friend. Frankly I've never been so heart sick.

No apology, no contact, nothing but silence from the neighbor. I reported the incident to animal control and they paid the owner a visit. Personally I don't think much will happen.

Certainly there must be a negligence problem here and I must have some claim on my loss.

Am I wrong in assuming that?

Thanks for any help someone could be.
Sam[/quote]

As others have said, part of the answer depends on the circumstances of the attack. If your poodle was in the pit bull's yard, it greatly lessens the chance that you will be able to collect anything. That doesn't mean that you shouldn't try, however. I would use the analogy that while it may not be okay for kids to cut through your backyard on the way to school (trespass), that doesn't necessarily give you the right to pull out a gun and blow them away. Particularly if the owner of the pit bull had prior knowledge that the dog was dangerous to other dogs, a judge may well find that s/he had a duty to keep the dog exceptionally well confined and/or muzzled to prevent the kind of tragedy you suffered from happening (it is, after all, foreseeable that a dog will encounter other dogs) and that his failure to do so was negligence.

If the dog attacked your dog on your property, or if your dog was properly restrained (leashed) or even under your control and the pit bull was not, your case is much, much clearer. Unfortunately, that still doesn't mean you will be made whole, since the law generally only awards the monetary value of the dog killed. For two of my three dogs, the monetary value would be zero. For the third, I probably could convince a court to award four or five thousand dollars, but so what? My dog would be dead and I would be devastated.

Personally, I am in favor of statutorily increasing the amounts payable to blameless victims of dog attacks, NOT because getting a lot of money would make me satisfied if my dog was attacked and killed. It won't. However, if people who want to own dog aggressive dogs have to pay, say, $10,000 when their dog kills another, they might start thinking whether it is really worth it for the feeling of coolness they get for owning the toughest dog on the block. And insurance companies might increase rates for people who want to own dog aggressive dogs.

primrose

Link to comment
Share on other sites

though i am sorry for your loss, like others i can't help but be bothered by your immediate thought to the money lost with the death of your dog. if he provided you with companionship and loyalty who gives a crap how much he cost.

that said, i seriously doubt anything will happen to your neighbor. he is wrong for not talking to you about the situation, but animal control generally does not follow up very well. beyond that, i'm not sure that an attack on another dog is grounds for removal of an animal. i could be wrong, as laws are different in different places, but a neighbor of mine has a dog that has attacked and killed two dogs and nothing happened. probably the worst that will come of the sitaution is a ticket for having the dog off-leash (if it was off leash)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Anonymous

[quote name='Mei-Mei'][quote]As others have said, part of the answer depends on the circumstances of the attack. If your poodle was in the pit bull's yard, it greatly lessens the chance that you will be able to collect anything. That doesn't mean that you shouldn't try, however. I would use the analogy that while it may not be okay for kids to cut through your backyard on the way to school (trespass), that doesn't necessarily give you the right to pull out a gun and blow them away. Particularly if the owner of the pit bull had prior knowledge that the dog was dangerous to other dogs, a judge may well find that s/he had a duty to keep the dog exceptionally well confined and/or muzzled to prevent the kind of tragedy you suffered from happening (it is, after all, foreseeable that a dog will encounter other dogs) and that his failure to do so was negligence.
[/quote]

I'm sorry. Take it from the me (I graduated from law school). This is almost completely, totally, absolutely 100% WRONG. It's true that if your poodle was in the pit bull's yard it lessens your chance to collect anything. But the rest is bunk. It's such dangerous, inaccurate bunk that it's almost frightening. Please explain your situation Sam so I can give you accurate legal advice that applies to your state and your particular situation.

Primrose, unless you've opened the civil code lately it's not the best idea to give legal advice. Having an opinion is one thing, giving the above sort of one side advice is another. :-?[/quote]

Mei-Mei is the bomb!!

I'm sorry I wsa rude in my original post ( I had a few :drinking: ). It just sems to me like ou are more conderned with recovering money than you are with the death of your baby.

It sounds to me by the way you say this


[quote]My dog was attack by a pit bull a [b]few doors up the street from where I live[/b] [/quote]

that your dog was offleash & not in his yard. If that is the cae, you have no leg to stand on, of course laws vary greatly but almost EVERY city has a leash law. I live in Texas, there is a dog that sometimes roams the streets & has JUMPED my neighbors fence in order to attack his dog. OH PRIMMY, GUESS WHAT [b]NEITHER[/b] DOG IS A PIT BULL. [b]IMAGINE THAT![/b] I called AC since I am very worried about this dog jumping into MY yard while my dogs were oustide. I was told that as long as I followed all dog owernship laws of my city ( leash laws, registered with the city, kept my fence in good repair, etc, etc ) then the actions of MY dogs are considered PROTECTIVE BEHAVIOUR and there would be no recourse towards me.

Debby

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Anonymous

There isn't much advice I can give, knowing next to nothing about law and stuff, plus not exactlly knowing the whole story (where your dog was when s/he got attacked). But I'm sorry for your loss


[quote name='Anonymous']I called AC since I am very worried about this dog jumping into MY yard while my dogs were oustide. I was told that as long as I followed all dog owernship laws of my city ( leash laws, registered with the city, kept my fence in good repair, etc, etc ) then the actions of MY dogs are considered PROTECTIVE BEHAVIOUR and there would be no recourse towards me.

Debby[/quote]

I was a little confused by this... AC told you that? What about if this dog jumped your fence and a horrible fight broke out and your dogs got hurt?!? :o To me that's a little dumb, and uselss AC :o They should DO something about this dog, because it's already attacked another, and they had gotten a complaint (from you) about being worried this dog would come after your dog next in their own home! :o That's scary. We dont' even HAVE AC around here, but if we did, I would expect them to do something about a dog wandering the streets and attacking other dogs in their own yards :o

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If that dog in in MY yard attacking MY dogs (or getting attacked by them) then I have recourse, not HIS owner. BUT I was concerned with the opposite. My dogs are pit bulls & most likely would do the most damage. Not to say my dogs wouldn't or couldn't get hurt as well and if that were the case there wouldbe some vet bills for him to pay.

And AC is only going to pick up the dog if it is running loose WHEN they get there, they won't go into someone's yard to take their dog based on MY word. The dog lives across the street from me & his owner puts him back in the fence when he is aware that he is out. Not good enough for me though. He shouldn't BE OUT period! The owner of the dog getting attacked did not make a complaint, I just inquired for my own piece of mind. In case he does decide to jump my fence.

Debby

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Anonymous

[quote name='Mei-Mei'][quote]As others have said, part of the answer depends on the circumstances of the attack. If your poodle was in the pit bull's yard, it greatly lessens the chance that you will be able to collect anything. That doesn't mean that you shouldn't try, however. I would use the analogy that while it may not be okay for kids to cut through your backyard on the way to school (trespass), that doesn't necessarily give you the right to pull out a gun and blow them away. Particularly if the owner of the pit bull had prior knowledge that the dog was dangerous to other dogs, a judge may well find that s/he had a duty to keep the dog exceptionally well confined and/or muzzled to prevent the kind of tragedy you suffered from happening (it is, after all, foreseeable that a dog will encounter other dogs) and that his failure to do so was negligence.
[/quote]

I'm sorry. Take it from the me (I graduated from law school). This is almost completely, totally, absolutely 100% WRONG. It's true that if your poodle was in the pit bull's yard it lessens your chance to collect anything. But the rest is bunk. It's such dangerous, inaccurate bunk that it's almost frightening. Please explain your situation Sam so I can give you accurate observations that applies to your state and your particular situation.

Primrose, unless you've opened the civil code lately it's not the best idea to give legal advice. Having an opinion is one thing, giving the above sort of one side advice is another. :-?[/quote]

*************************

How, exactly, is it "bunk," mei-mei? And what, exactly, is "the civil code" to which you refer? Are you under the impression that there is a nationwide "civil code" that applies to all states? Isn't tort law in most places mostly developed by caselaw, and aren't rules of liability constantly evolving?

Since you are a law school gradute (any luck on taking the bar exam?), maybe you could comment on the possibility of applying a strict liability analysis to pit bulls in cases of dog aggression. After all, pit bull owners know or should know that pit bulls have a tendency to be unreasonably dangerous toward other dogs. That is what they were BRED for. This is not to say that a strict liability analysis ever has been applied where a pit bull has attacked/killed another dog. (Probably nobody has bothered to try it because damages in dog aggression cases are so de minimus). But why wouldn't it be a good approach for plaintiff's lawyer to take where actual negligence by the pit bull owner is difficult to prove?

In any case, if the owner of the pit bull KNEW that his dog was dog aggressive, don't you think many courts would find that he had a much heightened duty to protect other people's dogs from the dog?

What if the owner of the pit bull knew he was people aggressive? Do you think a court would have any trouble finding negligence if the owner chained the dog in the front yard and a child wandered by and was killed? In your law school readings, did you happen to read the Maryland case where the landlord was found negligent (to the tune of six million dollars, as I recall) in the case of a toddler's death, more or less simply because the landlord had RENTED to somebody who owned a pit bull. Right? The Maryland Court of Appeals went out of its way to comment about the inherent dangerousness of pit bulls, right? (And this was to PEOPLE, you guys don't even dispute that pit bulls tend to be dangerous to other dogs).

primrose

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Anonymous

[quote name='cheekymunkee']If that dog in in MY yard attacking MY dogs (or getting attacked by them) then I have recourse, not HIS owner. BUT I was concerned with the opposite. My dogs are pit bulls & most likely would do the most damage. Not to say my dogs wouldn't or couldn't get hurt as well and if that were the case there wouldbe some vet bills for him to pay.

And AC is only going to pick up the dog if it is running loose WHEN they get there, they won't go into someone's yard to take their dog based on MY word. The dog lives across the street from me & his owner puts him back in the fence when he is aware that he is out. Not good enough for me though. He shouldn't BE OUT period! The owner of the dog getting attacked did not make a complaint, I just inquired for my own piece of mind. In case he does decide to jump my fence.

Debby[/quote]

I see... that's still dumb :lol: Your right, the dog shouldn't be out period. :evil: :drinking:


As for Primmy... :roll: You just LOVE to start fights don't you? :roll:
I for one, trust Mei's knowledge over yours :o

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sam i'm so sorry for your loss, i guess what you need to know is it doesn't matter the breed of a dog. It just needs a little human negligence for a tragedy can happen. Your dog can't be loose in the street just because it's a poodle, and of course is so wrong that this pit were aviable to kill your dog. So please if you have later another dog, learn how to be a good owner so you can have a healty and happy pet and teach it how to behave.

I've been reading this kind of threads where the original topic get lost because this primrose guest start fights for nothing. What i don't understad is why this guest is so important? why our mod Mei-mei has to expose her school history to a person who isn't brave enough to be a member in the board?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Anonymous

[quote name='izzy']Sam i'm so sorry for your loss, i guess what you need to know is it doesn't matter the breed of a dog. It just needs a little human negligence for a tragedy can happen. Your dog can't be loose in the street just because it's a poodle, and of course is so wrong that this pit were aviable to kill your dog. So please if you have later another dog, learn how to be a good owner so you can have a healty and happy pet and teach it how to behave.

I've been reading this kind of threads where the original topic get lost because this primrose guest start fights for nothing. What i don't understad is why this guest is so important? why our mod Mei-mei has to expose her school history to a person who isn't brave enough to be a member in the board?[/quote]

*********************************

I am not sure why you assume Sam needs to "learn how to be a good owner." According to Sam, his dog was attacked by the pit bull, not the other way around. There is nothing to indicate that Sam's dog was "loose in the street" so I don't know why you assume that, either. We don't know a lot of details about the situation, but what little we know indicates Sam believes that Sam's dog was a victim, not an instigator.

Nobody said mei-mei had to expose her school history. She chose to do it (as is her right, of course) as a way to try to bolster her credibility.

primrose

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Anonymous

[quote name='Mei-Mei']Primrose, you've asked a lot of questions that deserve to be answered. I will answer them to the best of my knowledge. For the others who may be reading this, I hope to impart a little information that may be interesting and informative.

[quote]How, exactly, is it "bunk," mei-mei? And what, exactly, is "the civil code" to which you refer? Are you under the impression that there is a nationwide "civil code" that applies to all states? Isn't tort law in most places mostly developed by caselaw, and aren't rules of liability constantly evolving?
[/quote]

Your answer is bunk because you did not apply the civil code of [i]any[/i] state to your answer. I told Sam (the original author) to tell me his state so that I could apply the law of that state to his situation. There is no nationwide civil code, and the rules of liability do evolve. That still has very little to do with how you [i][b]can give legal advice without complete knowledge of the situation[/b][/i]. F. Lee Bailey can't do that.

[quote]Since you are a law school gradute (any luck on taking the bar exam?), maybe you could comment on the possibility of applying a strict liability analysis to pit bulls in cases of dog aggression. After all, pit bull owners know or should know that pit bulls have a tendency to be unreasonably dangerous toward other dogs. That is what they were BRED for. This is not to say that a strict liability analysis ever has been applied where a pit bull has attacked/killed another dog. (Probably nobody has bothered to try it because damages in dog aggression cases are so de minimus). But why wouldn't it be a good approach for plaintiff's lawyer to take where actual negligence by the pit bull owner is difficult to prove?
[/quote]

I realize you are being sarcastic about the Bar exam. Permit me to enlighten you to my situation. I made the top LSAT score in the entire graduating class of my state. I graduated at the top of my class in law school and was named Who's Who in law and languages. I was invited by a foreign embassy to practice law in their country (my speciality was International Law). At the same time, I found out that my son had autism. Rather than practice law, I decided to dedicate my life to finding a cure for this terrible, pervasive condition and to devote myself to autistic causes. At this time I am involved in both the legal community in New Orleans and the autistic community in New Orleans. I make my living in the entertainment field which gives me plenty of off time to dedicate to my son, the most important person in the world.

I don't understand what the remainder of your paragraph has to do with this particular situation. Everyone should know that pit bulls are dog aggressive. Are you saying that negates the poodle owner's responsibility? What are you saying? Is it at all possible for you to apply yourself to [b]this[/b] situation? Of course, you can't, because you [b]don't have all the information.[/b]

No wise person tries to answer a question without all of the components. Why would you? Try, really hard, to apply yourself to the case before you. Then you can cite precedent. Until then, you're just blowing smoke.

You're not dumb, just argumentative. Why don't you wait for further info before spouting off? Is that so hard for you to do? Or is running your mouth more important than learning a little something? I've never seen someone so easily intimated by the credentials of others as you seem to be. Don't be so insecure.[/quote]

**********************

Jeeze. I wasn't giving Sam "legal advice." I hope you didn't intend to give Sam "legal advice," either (even AFTER you find out what state this happened in) since you aren't admitted to practice law. Given that that is true, it doesn't really matter what state this happened in, you aren't admitted to practice law there. We were just discussing a situation in a general way, not trying to give specific legal advice. At least I wasn't.

Indeed, if you think you can give Sam legal advice based on the laws of Sam's state, (which you will presumably look up on the internet, to the best of your ability) particularly after telling Sam you are a law school graduate, you are getting onto some sort of thin ice with regard to the unlicensed practice of law, don't you think? Maybe you shouldn't go there.

You didn't address the issue of strict liability in your answer. I would be interested to hear your thoughts on how the known propensity of pit bulls to be dog aggressive might play out in a strict liability kind of case. For example, if there are two dogs in a dog park, do you think the pit bull owner might reasonably be held to a higher standard of care than the owner of the sussex spaniel when a fight breaks out between the two?

And then there is reality. Have you read the Maryland case that assessed millions of dollars of damages against a landlord, basically because the Court of Appeals found that pit bulls are really dangerous and everybody knows it? How does THAT kind of judicial analysis affect your thoughts about this situation?

By the way, way back in some thread somebody says that the anti-BSL forces may have lost in Boston, but they won in Colorado. Do you think that is true? I think it is likely backwards, that is it is pretty likely that they will lose in Colorado, and it is at least reasonable to hope for an eventual victory in Boston (Given appellate caselaw both places). But what do I know?

So sorry about your son's autism. I know we all wish you and he the best and hope for a lot of progress toward a cure.

primrose

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Mei is absolutely correct. It depends on the area of the country, their civil code, whether there is BSL in action, whehter Sams dog was loose on his own property, or wandered off to the property of the dog that killed him. Sam, I am sorry for your loss, but all of the above will be what determines (with a lawyers help) what the eventual recompense, if any, would be.
Also if there are leash laws in your area, if your dog was loose the odds are good the case means nothing, since you would be in violation of the local leash law. You need to confirm all this with a lawyer in your area familar with civil code on dogs.

and no, Primmy, I am not a law graduate. My father was a judge, and taught me alot about it growing up.

even without a law degree, I can tell you the laws in every area of the country are different. Civil code is up to the area, not the feds.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm sorry to hear of your sad loss truly I am. If your dog was on this other dogs territory then there is a lesson to be learned from this and I am sure that I don't need to dictate to you as you are grieving. Dogs should be kept on their own turf and under control. If they cross into another dogs territory regardless of breed, that territorial dog will do what comes naturally...that is to harm or kill and penultimately it will not be the jaws of the other dog that will be responsible for the offending dog(s) death.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You know Im sure if Sam, the guest who started this thread, wouldve said just a dog instead of a pit bull Primmy wouldnt be all over this thread.

I think its stupid to argue with Prim, where does it get us? As for what this was originally about, I have no advice but I would say its better to trust what Mei has to say than Primmy.

...when will the madness stop?!?!? :drinking: :shocked!:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote]Indeed, if you think you can give Sam legal advice based on the laws of Sam's state, (which you will presumably look up on the internet, to the best of your ability) particularly after telling Sam you are a law school graduate, you are getting onto some sort of thin ice with regard to the unlicensed practice of law, don't you think? Maybe you shouldn't go there.
[/quote]

Now that is one stupid statement! Is she charging Sam or any one else a fee for her advice? Is she representing him in court? jeezuzeffnchrise!! You must have an arm span of 200 yards with as far as you reach. She put you in your place & you are bothered by it. You don't have to admit it Primmy, we ALL know.

Debby

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Anonymous

[quote name='courtnek']Mei is absolutely correct. It depends on the area of the country, their civil code, whether there is BSL in action, whehter Sams dog was loose on his own property, or wandered off to the property of the dog that killed him. Sam, I am sorry for your loss, but all of the above will be what determines (with a lawyers help) what the eventual recompense, if any, would be.
Also if there are leash laws in your area, if your dog was loose the odds are good the case means nothing, since you would be in violation of the local leash law. You need to confirm all this with a lawyer in your area familar with civil code on dogs.

and no, Primmy, I am not a law graduate. My father was a judge, and taught me alot about it growing up.

even without a law degree, I can tell you the laws in every area of the country are different. Civil code is up to the area, not the feds.[/quote]

************************

Uh, yeah. I pointed that out to Mei-Mei when she was implying that I shouldn't comment until I had read "the" civil code. Anyway, I am sure your father would not want you to be implying that there is no such thing as federal civil law and procedure. There's plenty of it, just that it doesn't tend to apply to dog bite cases.

Alas, it may not be worth it for poor Sam to hire a lawyer to litigate this case, so telling him that he needs a lawyer isn't much help. In most places, all a person whose dog is wrongfully killed by another dog (that is, even if your leashed dog who is exactly where he is allowed to be is attacked and killed) can collect is the market value of the dog and even a fairly valuable dog does not tend to be worth enough to cover the costs of hiring a lawyer to bring a case to trial.

Luckily there is small claims court, which may be a good place for this to end up and where usually litigants don't need to lawyers.

By the you probably shouldn't be implying to Sam that he should necessarily think that even if his dog was off leash and there is a leash law that he will not prevail. If his dog being off leash was not the proximate cause of the fight (for example, if his dog was off leash but right next to him and the other dog charged over and attacked), Sam's dog's off-leashedness should probably not be relevant.

Would everybody on this board support a change to the rule about compensating owners of dogs killed by other dogs? That is, would you all support, say, a statutory award of, for example, $10,000 for the owner of a dog whose dog was wrongfully killed by another dog? What this would likely do is make insurance companies VERY hesitant about issuing insurance to people with dog aggressive dogs. That means that if you want to own a dog aggressive dog, you get to pay the costs UPFRONT in the form of higher insurance premiums.

Personally, I think that is fair. $10,000 wouldn't begin to actually compensate me if one of my dogs was wrongfully killed (as one was, actually) by another dog. But at least I would know that the person who was at fault walked away with more than a "gee, sorry, but accidents happen" which is the state of the law most places now.

primrose

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I will not argue with you. It is BECAUSE some places adhere more strongly to the local leash laws that I suggested he contact a lawyer. What he does is up to him. but HERE, if you are in violation of the leash law, and your dog bites someone, or gets bitten, the dogs not on leashes are held responsible. if both are off leash there may be a chance. but if your dog, offleash, approaches one onleash and gets bitten, it's "oh well,,shoulda been on leash".

they do not want to implement BSL here, so they DO enforce the existing dog laws and civil codes. Here, in case you're interested (although I'm sure your not) if a dog is found wandering loose WITHOUT A RABIES TAG ON ITS COLLAR, and it wont COME to the AC people, they can shoot it.
bang. plain and simple. There is a lot of wildlife in this area. a rabies-untagged dog is considered a threat. If they cant catch it, legally they can shoot it. surprising? there are other places in the country like this as well.

If the police or an ambulance comes to your dog, and the dog is aggressive towards them, they can shoot it then too. If you HAVE dogs, and an
ambulance comes, the police will escort it, just in case. I had to go to the hospital last night, in an ambulance. 911 asked if we had dogs. Kyle said yes. They asked if the dogs could be "put away" so the ambulance drivers could enter the house. he put them in the yard. he told them he did that,so they did not have to send a police escort. When the ambulance got here, and they were taking me away, the EMT's said "son. let the dogs in before you follow, just in case"

so yes, they look after the dogs here, and enforce the laws.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='primorse']

*********************************

I am not sure why you assume Sam needs to "learn how to be a good owner." According to Sam, his dog was attacked by the pit bull, not the other way around. There is nothing to indicate that Sam's dog was "loose in the street" so I don't know why you assume that, either. We don't know a lot of details about the situation, but what little we know indicates Sam believes that Sam's dog was a victim, not an instigator.

[/quote]

And likewise there is nothing to indicate that his dog WAS NOT loose in the street. Since none of us were there, none of us know what happened either way, whether his dog instigated or the other dog did. Including you.
And of course if your dog is killed in whatever situation, you are going to feel like they are the victim, even if they did start it.

Sam, I am sorry about the loss of your dog, but I too am troubled by the fact that you listed money first.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...