Unfortunately, the Maryland Senate has signed the death warrant for a lot of innocent dogs. On the bright side, I can hear the Plaintiff Bar licking their chops…
Yet millions of criminals are stil on the loose or living comfortably with HDTV and a Martha Stewart cookbook in there jail cell. Shame on this country
Another reason all landlords should require a tenant to have renters insurance with $300,000 liablity and coverage for thier dog. Carriers need to stop excluding breeds and charge more for animal liablity if it is a defined vicious breed. So tired of seeing other pick up the tab for someone else.
How about jail time instead of strict liability? If you have a vicious dog, it’s because you raised it that way. That should warrant jail time. Trying to sue someone with nothing does no good.
Does anyone know what part of the ruling was reversed? “reverses a part of the ruling by the Maryland Court of Appeals that made landlords strictly liable for pit bull bites.” Are “landlords” no longer strictly liable for a tenant’s dog who bites someone?
Here’s what “strict liability” does. It makes a dog owner responsible for a bite whether the owner was negligent or not. Thus, a kid climbs my fence and pokes my dog with a stick. My dog bites the kid and I’m liable.
Yes an owner who trains his dog to be vicious should be liable if the dog bites someone due to his negligence. But that would already be the case under a “comparative negligence” standard. All strict liability does is put liability onto people who did nothing wrong. That is plain stupid.
Face it, it’s all about the money. It’s about another way for lawyers and unscrupulous individuals to pick the pockets of the insurance industry and, by extension, the public. Politician = Lawyer is the simple equation here.
Strict liability is usually reserved for products manufacturers. My comment about someone that trains their dog to be vicious said it should be a crime. Not a liability issue. If the person has nothing, litigating them is pointless. Put them in jail.
Unfortunately, the Maryland Senate has signed the death warrant for a lot of innocent dogs. On the bright side, I can hear the Plaintiff Bar licking their chops…
Another lovely decision by the best politicians money can buy – the Maryland politicians.
As usual for politics, the cure is worse than the disease.
Yet millions of criminals are stil on the loose or living comfortably with HDTV and a Martha Stewart cookbook in there jail cell. Shame on this country
Another reason all landlords should require a tenant to have renters insurance with $300,000 liablity and coverage for thier dog. Carriers need to stop excluding breeds and charge more for animal liablity if it is a defined vicious breed. So tired of seeing other pick up the tab for someone else.
How about jail time instead of strict liability? If you have a vicious dog, it’s because you raised it that way. That should warrant jail time. Trying to sue someone with nothing does no good.
Does anyone know what part of the ruling was reversed? “reverses a part of the ruling by the Maryland Court of Appeals that made landlords strictly liable for pit bull bites.” Are “landlords” no longer strictly liable for a tenant’s dog who bites someone?
Ay, chihuahua! Mi poocho est un hazard!
Here’s what “strict liability” does. It makes a dog owner responsible for a bite whether the owner was negligent or not. Thus, a kid climbs my fence and pokes my dog with a stick. My dog bites the kid and I’m liable.
Yes an owner who trains his dog to be vicious should be liable if the dog bites someone due to his negligence. But that would already be the case under a “comparative negligence” standard. All strict liability does is put liability onto people who did nothing wrong. That is plain stupid.
Face it, it’s all about the money. It’s about another way for lawyers and unscrupulous individuals to pick the pockets of the insurance industry and, by extension, the public. Politician = Lawyer is the simple equation here.
Strict liability is usually reserved for products manufacturers. My comment about someone that trains their dog to be vicious said it should be a crime. Not a liability issue. If the person has nothing, litigating them is pointless. Put them in jail.
Who wrote this article?! i cant find the name of the writter or publisher! anyone knows!?