Don't Like the Ads? Upgrade your experience to remove the ads for only $20.00 per year.


Don't Like the Ads? Upgrade your experience to remove the ads for only $20.00 per year.
Sign in to follow this  

My Cat case moves to Lawsuit... So I need 51% my way.... Lets debate!

Recommended Posts

I need to see if I have 51% of the propanderance of the evidence.

 

In case you don't know Monday morning about 3am I hear dogs out front of my house. I look out and see two dogs having my cat surrounded. I run out of the house and chased the dogs on up the street. My cat got bit on his back side which has caused me to have a $500 Vet bill.

 

The Dogs in question that I saw...

One dog was white with black spots. The spots are all over it's body. I've seen the dog out before so I was familiar with it just that I had seen it before. This dog I saw had my cat in his mouth during the attack. He actually was swinging it around.

 

Second dog was a Brown short hair Large dog. As I chased the dogs away that dog actually came back at me while I was looking over my cat and was barking. I then chased in farther up the street. But that dog I remembered well.

 

The next day I had thought about the dogs more and thought I had seen the dogs before. And I checked the house where I believed they belonged and there they were inside the house. Why probably because they get out of there yard.

 

Problem...

I was the only one to see the dogs. And I don't have any witnesses.

 

Do I have 51%?

 

The dog owner is saying she doesn't believe her dogs were out.

At first she was going to pay the Vet bill but now she's Worming out of it.

 

So I need 51%...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Click here to get 6 months Select Satellite Radio for $30 at SiriusXM.com

Don't Like the Ads? Upgrade your experience to remove the ads for only $20.00 per year.
Get 6 months of SiriusXM All Access for only $50

Don't Like the Ads? Upgrade your experience to remove the ads for only $20.00 per year.
Click here to get 6 months Select Satellite Radio for $30 at SiriusXM.com

It's not worth it. It's going to be too hard to prove that your cat didn't contribute to the attack or that you did correctly identify the dogs. They only have to prove that at 1%.

 

You can file a small claims suit in small claims court. When you go, you will be there with a bunch of other cases. The judge likely will have you go into the court's mediation room or have you try and work it out in the court room. He then will come back and begin hearing cases. If you don't have it worked out he will come to a decision based on facts and you likely will be responsible for court costs should you win or lose.

 

Also if you do win, the court is not going to help you collect the debt. That's up to you. You can record a judgement at an additional costs but you will have to collect that as well.

 

Mitigating a $500 bill in court can be more costly than it's worth. Should you lose, they can counter sue for court costs and legal fees.

 

What I would do is try and scare her. Fill out the appropriate paperwork and take it to her house. Tell her you are going to file a summary judgement which could entitle you to a lien on her assets if she doesn't assist you with the costs.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What you have is a 50/50 case right now with what you have said. Things you need to do to try and get the scale to tip in your balance.

 

1) Contact Animal Control in your county. I know you said in the other post that you were told to contact them, but I am not sure that you have. See if they have been called about these animals before. Whether it be an attack on a human, another animal or just on the loose to where they were called out.

 

2) Talk to the surrounding neighbors. See if any of them can say they have seen the dogs out before or even better yet, on the night in question. Yes there will door knocking involved and a little sweat and probably some nasty people who do not want to get involved, however your shifting weight could be among them.

 

If nothing in the above helps you then as I said you are 50/50. Then it will come down to credibility. How well it is you vs them in the court room and who the judge believes.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I tried but they directed me to animal control. I needed to call them that night. I wish I had but things were moving so fast.

Animal control said I would have been 50% at fault due to cat being out.

You know they really leave you with very little choices of what to do as something like that happens. I have a 20 gauge that I have now bought a box of Bird Shot for. So next time I have to protect mine. Thats how it is there dogs going home wounded.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
MarauderHD ]

I tried but they directed me to animal control. I needed to call them that night. I wish I had but things were moving so fast.

Animal control said I would have been 50% at fault due to cat being out.

You know they really leave you with very little choices of what to do as something like that happens. I have a 20 gauge that I have now bought a box of Bird Shot for. So next time I have to protect mine. Thats how it is there dogs going home wounded.

 

Every responsible person should own a gun IMO. That being said it's nothing to handle lightly you can seriously injure or kill something or someone landing yourself in jail. Think before you go flying out the front door with one in the chamber. Personal defense is one thing but what you are talking about could have you doing time.

 

I would recommend keeping your cat indoors. You let it out and it could have just as easily got hit by a car as it got attacked by dogs. IMO when people let their animals out they are responsible for the danger they are in.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What I'm talking about is someones dogs coming onto my property and trying to kill my dogs, cats, or people.

One thing I've learned is I have the right to defend with whatever I need to. I also have a Bat ready as well.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Quite frankly I believe that you have enough for a court case..small claims would be the way to go. To say that your cat is partly at fault because it was outside, in my opinion nothing personal, is completely ridiculous. There are leash laws in every state for dogs...not for cats...and as such dogs are not permitted to roam the streets. So I would check out what your leash laws are and to find out if those dogs are licensed.

 

Secondly, since you found the house that has TWO dogs that fit the description of the ones you saw on the night of the attack, certainly gives credibly to the fact that these ARE the dogs in question. The odds of someone else in your neighborhood having two more dogs that also fit the description is highly unlikely but probable.

 

Thirdly, you say that the dogs owner had at first given you some indication that she would pay the vet bill but now is balking at that. That is more evidence for you.she first agreed and now is trying to back out of it..probably because she didn't think that it would cost so much.

 

Now my suggestion to you would be to either go on the internet to research small claims cases in your state and see what you need to do or stop by the local court house, every state is different. It will cost you to file for the case but that would most likely be given back to you if win the claim. If you win and she still doesn't pay it would cost you again to collect the judgment, but that also would be figured into the execution of collecting the judgment. Quick case I had here...I took a local repair shop to court for damage they caused to my lawn tractor that they denied doing. They never showed up on the court date and a judgment was issued on my behalf. The court sets another date to see if I have been paid...I hadn't..they issue a warrant to secure the judgment. Now I contact a constable (or a deputy sheriff) to serve that execution. Now here I had my choice...they could arrest the owner and take him to court or they could collect the judgment plus the remaining fees that the constable added on for his services. He goes to the business and was going to arrest the owner but they asked if they could pay it...which he allowed them to do..so now a $200 judgment in my favor cost that business just around $700. In some cases the deputy sheriff or constable could go to the defendant and secure property from them that covers the judgment and the property seized can be of any value greater than the judgment. They could have seized this shops 2009 Ford F-250 shop truck and turned it over to me to satisfy the judgment..doesn't seem right but it is!!!

 

Good luck.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What about this...

The only problem I see is that I'm half at fault due to the Cat being outside.

 

But Technically the Cat doesn't belong to us. When we moved in it started visiting our house and playing with my daughter and our gray cat. I think several people feed it because it's Fat. Or it visits other people because it's a real friendly Cat. If you gave him a can of food he'd live at your house for awhile.

So maybe I can sue on behave of the Cat. Then that makes me a witness and I could try and get 100% paid instead of half.

 

Our Gray cat sleeps inside at night because he's ours. The Cat that got attacked doesn't because he's not ours.

We pet him and feed him and call him something but really he's a neighborhood cat.

What do you think?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

neighborhood cat? forget it man...or, answer these

 

1. did you see the dogs travel from your yard to the house you claim they live in?

 

2. did you take pictures of the attack to back up your descriptions?

 

3. could you accurately pick the dogs you clain to saw out of a group of like animals?

 

case in point...

 

me013.jpg

 

these are my dogs. one of em attacked your cat. im bringin em both to court, you tell me which one did it. one of em is 4, the other is 10. one ways about 35 lbs, the other about 40. one has long wiry hair, the other has short smooth hair. now the fact that the descriptions match a number of your neighbors dogs does lend credibility to your case, but if your neighbor has half a brain, they are getting pictures of every dog in a 5 mile raduis of your house.

 

best of luck to you, whichever way you decide to go ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The spotted dog is Huge almost Great Dane huge. And lots of spots you can't bring me 2 dogs that looks like it does.

Now ya'll are supposed to be helping me. I have to try and get around a fucking $600 vet bill that fell my lap. That's the real issue.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
xPUDDYTATx ]

 

 

me013.jpg

 

 

 

Also I've learned this. If a dog gets out of his owners yard.Climbs or gets in your fenced in yard. Knalls on one of your dogs causes vet bills. You see the dog in question and know where it lives. Your half at fault for not having your dogs secure on a leash or in your house. Half.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
MarauderHD ]

Also I've learned this. If a dog gets out of his owners yard.Climbs or gets in your fenced in yard. Knalls on one of your dogs causes vet bills. You see the dog in question and know where it lives. Your half at fault for not having your dogs secure on a leash or in your house. Half.

 

Half, not 51%. I guess it could go both ways depending on what the other person does. I'm definitely interested in hearing how this goes. I really hope you win, bro. A $600 vet bill is no joke!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Rockman35 ]

Quite frankly I believe that you have enough for a court case..small claims would be the way to go. To say that your cat is partly at fault because it was outside, in my opinion nothing personal, is completely ridiculous. There are leash laws in every state for dogs...not for cats...and as such dogs are not permitted to roam the streets. So I would check out what your leash laws are and to find out if those dogs are licensed.

 

Secondly, since you found the house that has TWO dogs that fit the description of the ones you saw on the night of the attack, certainly gives credibly to the fact that these ARE the dogs in question. The odds of someone else in your neighborhood having two more dogs that also fit the description is highly unlikely but probable.

 

Thirdly, you say that the dogs owner had at first given you some indication that she would pay the vet bill but now is balking at that. That is more evidence for you.she first agreed and now is trying to back out of it..probably because she didn't think that it would cost so much.

 

Now my suggestion to you would be to either go on the internet to research small claims cases in your state and see what you need to do or stop by the local court house, every state is different. It will cost you to file for the case but that would most likely be given back to you if win the claim. If you win and she still doesn't pay it would cost you again to collect the judgment, but that also would be figured into the execution of collecting the judgment. Quick case I had here...I took a local repair shop to court for damage they caused to my lawn tractor that they denied doing. They never showed up on the court date and a judgment was issued on my behalf. The court sets another date to see if I have been paid...I hadn't..they issue a warrant to secure the judgment. Now I contact a constable (or a deputy sheriff) to serve that execution. Now here I had my choice...they could arrest the owner and take him to court or they could collect the judgment plus the remaining fees that the constable added on for his services. He goes to the business and was going to arrest the owner but they asked if they could pay it...which he allowed them to do..so now a $200 judgment in my favor cost that business just around $700. In some cases the deputy sheriff or constable could go to the defendant and secure property from them that covers the judgment and the property seized can be of any value greater than the judgment. They could have seized this shops 2009 Ford F-250 shop truck and turned it over to me to satisfy the judgment..doesn't seem right but it is!!!

 

Good luck.

 

Ok no offense but I think your thinking about this along the lines of an animal lover. Which is fine I have pets and think of them as family as well.

 

On the other hand under your theory everyone should just let their cats roam free but definitely not dogs. Every time one gets ran over, kicked by a kid, mauled by dogs, etc. they should just sue??? Really??? No personal accountability at all? Just because dogs are to be kept on leashes everyone else should let their rabbits, mice, ferrets, hamsters, rats, snakes, turtles and fish run free?

 

Look I understand the cat got hurt the OP has a huge bill he has to pay and for that I feel bad and all but if anything it should be 50/50 at best. Both parties are at fault IMO.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

OK UPDATE AND ENDING....

 

The cat was able to come home today. The Bill was $378. The dog owner was going to give me $200 a few days ago towards the bill. I was not so nice to her that day and I told her that I planned on taking her to court. Oh and I might have added you better hope your dogs don't get out again. Well tonight I was like the $200 would be more then half. And I probably would only get that if I won in court.

So I have my wife call her. And say we would accept the $200. She at first only wanted to pay the Vet. But the bill was already paid so the vet wouldn't accept it.

Then I called her back and said. Right now I feel that the $200 would be fair and we could end our problem tonight or we can let it continue. I said that I might have been angry when we spoke before and I was willing to put this behind us. And assured her that I wouldn't harm her dogs if I see them out again. (We'll see ha ha)

 

 

Moral to this story keep your animals secured and under control. If your dog or cat is running free outside if something happens your 50% at fault. Also I'm more ready now with a Baseball bat I have tucked inside a bush.

 

The guy who asked about 51%... That how much of the evidence you would have to prove in court.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Here's my story where I told the owner to go fuck himself. I was out with my dog and he was leashed as I was handling him. Out of no where this Chihuahua came and attacked my dog. When I seen him I started laughing because my Dog is a Husky, 1Yr old. and he was like wtf too. Well the Chihuahua was mixed with something because he was bigger than the average Chihuahua. I might also add that that dog wasn't leashed. Well My he bit my dog and my dog got pissed and bit him behind the neck and whipped him to the ground. I had to pull him away because the how he killed the squirrel. Then Gangster guy comes all pissed off saying wtf. I was like your dog started it and my dog finished it and walked away. My dog didn't suffer anything his dog had a cut on his back.Thought it was Funny. Now my dog has a bite, I still have a scar on my chest from 4 months ago when I tried to take a lollypop from his mouth. first and last time he ever attacked my like that.

 

 

6016_1220839565308_1358515065_25108.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

On the other hand under your theory everyone should just let their cats roam free but definitely not dogs This isn't my theory..just stating that I have never heard of "leash laws" for cats like they have for dogs thusly yes..cats can just roam free!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Rockman35 ]

On the other hand under your theory everyone should just let their cats roam free but definitely not dogs This isn't my theory..just stating that I have never heard of "leash laws" for cats like they have for dogs thusly yes..cats can just roam free!!

 

Ok but if you willingly let your cat roam free then IMO you give up all rights to your cat. If your cat get's raped by Mike Tyson that is your fault and you cannot sue. Just because there isn't a law doesn't mean that people can't use common sense. Last I checked there isn't a leash law for kids so maybe I just let mine run free. :D

 

Before that guy went through Mickey D's and ordered a hot cup of coffee and spilled it on himself there wasn't a law about the lids on hot cups at restaurants either. Now because he was to stupid to know that a hot cup of coffee is hot there is. Not to mention his stupidity has made him a multi millionaire and spawned thousands of other lawsuits. All these lawsuits and new laws are things that are unnecessary if people would just use some common sense and not be so greedy looking for the easy pay day.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Agreed...everyone likes to sue....this Country is sue crazy and you know what...like the Mc'D's lawsuit..shame on the Courts for allowing it to go forward!! On a side note that I'm not 100% sure about...I think the McD's one was overturned but not sure of the particulars.

 

BTW Don't think Tyson likes Pussy!!! :-\

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Here is that change the Mickey D's lawsuit. Still pretty ridiculous!!

 

Liebeck v. McDonald's Restaurants,[1] also known as the “McDonald's coffee case,†is a 1994 product liability lawsuit that became a flashpoint in the debate in the U.S. over tort reform after a jury awarded $2.86 million to a woman who burned herself with hot coffee. The trial judge reduced the total award to $640,000, and the parties settled for a confidential amount before an appeal was decided. The case entered popular understanding as an example of frivolous litigation;[2] ABC News calls the case “the poster child of excessive lawsuits.â€[3]

 

Liebeck's attorneys argued that McDonald's coffee was "defective", claiming that it was too hot and more likely to cause serious injury than coffee served at any other place. Moreover, McDonald's had refused several prior opportunities to settle for less than the $640,000 ultimately awarded.[4] Reformers defend the popular understanding of the case as materially accurate; note that the vast majority of judges to consider similar cases dismiss them before they get to a jury; and argue that McDonald's refusal to offer more than a nuisance settlement reflects the meritless nature of the suit rather than any wrongdoing.[5][6]

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
Sign in to follow this  

Don't Like the Ads? Upgrade your experience to remove the ads for only $20.00 per year.