Results 1 to 7 of 7
  1. #1
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Posts
    2

    Default Liabiity for Vet Bills for a Stray Dog, Hit by Car

    My question involves a traffic accident in the State of: CA

    My husband hit a stray dog while driving 30-35 mph in our neighborhood. (So, he was going a little fast). Two women ran out from a nearby house and wanted to help the dog. He was too traumatized to really think through what should happen next. The women told him they would take care of the dog and asked for his phone# and asked if he would contribute. He told them he would then drove on. Now, they're tellling us that they spent over $1600 at the vet and want him to pay for it. If he'd been thinking clearly he wouldn't just called animal control and if that wasn't their responsibility the most we wouldn't done is had the vet put the dog to sleep. One of the women is a lawyer and now she's trying to hold the fact that he was speeding over his head for the money. What is our true responsibility?

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    OH10
    Posts
    17,019

    Default Re: Hit Stray Dog. Passersby Took Dog to Vet. Asking for $1600

    Actually, what you are describing is that your husband was driving down the road and a stray dog ran into the road, in front of his car. I would love to see if the lawyer had a radar unit in her pocket. The truth is she and her friend chose to incur a bill for the dog, not your husband. It would be nice if he chipped in, however they assumed responsibility for the bill.

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    New Jersey
    Posts
    3,666

    Default Re: Hit Stray Dog. Passersby Took Dog to Vet. Asking for $1600

    Turn it over to your husbands insurance company or pay the bill for the lady's.

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    LA LA Land
    Posts
    9,170

    Default Re: Hit Stray Dog. Passersby Took Dog to Vet. Asking for $1600

    Quote Quoting frazzledmom
    View Post
    ... asked if he would contribute.
    That's my favorite part in the entire post... As if to say the ladies took on full responsibility for the care and cost of taking care of the dog and left hubby the "option to contribute"... If he wants!

    Frazzled, just because you think the dog is a stray doesn't mean it is so the decision to "just put the dog to sleep" is really not up to you... even if you had called animal control, they too would have had the dog treated for its injuries and guess who pays for that? That's right, hubby does...

    Who'sThatGuy has good advice, hubby should turn it over to his insurer and have them take care of any legitimate claims.

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Behind a Desk
    Posts
    98,846

    Default Re: Hit Stray Dog. Passersby Took Dog to Vet. Asking for $1600

    Liability for costs of hitting an animal is not automatic, and even "going a little fast" does not translate into automatic liability.

    But the negligence case seems weak, as the claim is not being made by the dog's owner, just by a couple of people who wanted to help a stray. Whatever duty is owed to the general public or to the owner of the dog, it becomes somewhat attenuated to argue that it should extend to third parties who have no interest in the injured animal but take it upon themselves to intervene.

    The issue here, as I see it, was hubby's expression that "he would contribute". He may not have known how much the vet bills would be, but he agreed to pay at least part of their cost. I expect that the lawyer knows how to bring a claim of "equitable estoppel" ("detrimental reliance") when she pursues her case in court, and would be proceeding on that basis.
    Quote Quoting Driscoll v. City of Los Angeles (1967) 67 Cal.2d 297, at p. 305, 61 Cal. Rptr. 661, 431 P.2d 245.
    Generally speaking, four elements must be present in order to apply the doctrine of equitable estoppel: (1) the party to be estopped must be apprised of the facts; (2) he must intend that his conduct shall be acted upon, or must so act that the party asserting the estoppel had a right to believe it was so intended; (3) the other party must be ignorant of the true state of facts; and (4) he must rely upon the conduct to his injury.

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Posts
    2

    Default Re: Hit Stray Dog. Passersby Took Dog to Vet. Asking for $1600

    I think the evidence that the dog is a stray was provided by the women themselves. They said they'd been feeding this stray dog for several weeks prior to the accident. It turns out these ladies are big-time animal rights activists. After the dog healed they found him a home out-of-state through an agency they associate with. I think they would've spent this kind of money on any injured animal they came upon even if there was no one to assisst.

    I'll have to ask our auto insurance what kind of coverage for injury to an animal. It never even dawned on me that animals were covered. I think it would be safer having our insurer's lawyers talk to this woman. I'm afraid anything we say could be misconstrued. Our intent was to pay the cost of euthenization. I also think I should call animal control and find out what they would've done had we called them. I think our legal obligation is probably found in what they say. Am I on the right track?

    Do we need a lawyer? We're thinking of offering to pay the cost of euthenization. We'll get a letter from the vet we would've taken the dog to explaining the cost and use that as a guide toward our responsbility. But we're afraid to talk to this woman ourselves because we may unwittingly worsen our case. I worked in a law office when I was young and saw how easy it is to say something that can be used against you.

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Behind a Desk
    Posts
    98,846

    Default Re: Hit Stray Dog. Passersby Took Dog to Vet. Asking for $1600

    If you have coverage and are sued, you can turn the claim over to your insurance. You may have coverage for a negligence claim; I am less optimistic that you have coverage for an equitable estoppel claim where you have no liability to the plaintiff for the alleged negligence. If you do not have coverage and are sued you will need to choose between paying, settling for less than the full claim, and going to trial to try to get the amount reduced or to win the lawsuit. I would expect this to be a small claims action. For $1,600, it's difficult to believe that it would be economically sensible to retain a lawyer to represent you in a lawsuit, although if you are sued and have insurance coverage your insurance company should provide representation.

    1. Sponsored Links
       

Similar Threads

  1. Traffic Accidents: Drunk Driver's Liabiity for Injuring a Passenger
    By markx in forum Accidents and Injuries
    Replies: 7
    Last Post: 12-08-2010, 10:51 PM
  2. Landlord Always Around Odd Hours Feeding Stray Cats
    By lawlesslost in forum Landlord-Tenant Law
    Replies: 20
    Last Post: 06-20-2008, 02:37 PM
  3. Emancipation: Helpign a 17-year old Abused Stray Kid
    By nevergiveuphope in forum Juvenile Law
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 04-15-2007, 10:16 PM
  4. Bankruptcy Issues: Too Many Bills
    By sluna77 in forum Bankruptcy Law
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 11-02-2005, 09:29 AM
 
 
Sponsored Links

Legal Help, Information and Resources