Posted on 05/07/2008 6:37:34 AM PDT by Dan Nunn
DULUTH, Minn. - The driver of a 1997 Honda Civic that struck and killed a dog near Cloquet is suing the dog's owners for damage done to his vehicle.
Jeffery Ely was driving on the night of Jan. 4 when Fester, a miniature pinscher, squeezed past owner Nikki Munthe as she was letting in her other dog and ran out onto the road. Ely's car struck Fester, killing the 13-pound dog instantly.
Now Ely is suing the Munthes for about $1,100 for damage to his car, time he had to take off from his two jobs to get the car repaired, and court fees.
(Excerpt) Read more at startribune.com ...
I live on a back country road. The speed limit is 45. Not every residential road is 25mph.
PETA......
If you hit a raccoon, possum, or a deer that belongs to nobody, there is nobody liable to sue, unless you feel like suing God, since as the Creator, he might be responsible for damages caused by his creation. Otherwise, that's a loss you have to financially eat.
"So if a 2008 Escalade hits my 1995 Toyota Celica, the driver of the Escalade should not be held accountable? Am I SOL because I drive a POS?"
Irrelevant. If your POS falls apart after running over a 'possum, then you should be cited for operation of an unsafe vehicle on public roads.
Yes people are responsible if their dog bites someone or destroys something, but drivers also have to be responsible for their own driving. Everyone sues over a simple accident anymore! The lady should have been more careful with her dog and the driver shouldn’t have been going so fast that hitting a small animal would wreck his car. So she lost her dog and he has to fix his car. That’s where it should have ended. Either of them filing a lawsuit is ridiculous. His car would have been just as damaged if he hit a raccoon. There are too many lawsuits about stupid things these days. This is like suing McDonald’s if the hot coffee burns you. Sometimes an animal will go into the street. Even in drivers ed class they teach kids that!
The Munthes have filed a $2,400 counter-suit against Ely for the cost to buy Fester, the time they had to take off work for court appearances, and the cost of buying a dog to replace Fester.
The accident occurred in St. Louis County, Minnesota, per the article. (And, it's even scheduled for Friday, per the local court's Web site.) Look at a map. St. Louis County, Minnesota is a rural area. So yea, Scotty, the speed limit was probably not 25.
Good luck with that legal theory.
Actually the $1,100 is for damage to his car, time he had to take off from his two jobs to get the car repaired, and court fees. There is no breakdown on how much the actual car damage was?
You are correct. If the guy was driving an unsafe vehicle then I would say the responsibility is a push.
The description of POS was based on the age of the car in the story. There was no other evidence of the car being a POS. My POS 1995 Celica is in pristine condition but I think that if I were the driver in the story my car would be referred to as a POS based on the age of the car.
Assuming that you are correct about the insurance coverage, he willfully declined the collision/comp available to him. That was a conscious decision on his part to assume the risk. That is just not semantics. Assuming risk has meaning in the real world. To decide to manage the coll/comp side of an auto policy is way cool until until the obligatory aspect of that decision presents itself. Nonetheless, at the time insurance was taken out, the choice was a rational one, since a 97 Honda Civic, with 120,000 miles on it, in fair condition, in the Midwest has a trade-in value of about $1600.
The $1100 estimate is for a body shop to do an A-1 repair. The vehicle does not deserve that kind of restoration - kinda like giving Helen Thomas a spa treatment.
I might even agree with you if he actually got the car repaired and the owners of the dog paid the bill directly to the shop, but as in many cases of cars that old, the driver takes the money makes the necessary mechanical repairs using bone yard parts and pockets the difference. In your opinion, is he entitled to do that?
Get this one. On Judge Judy, this womans daughter was killed when she and a friend of her daughters...took her friends car for a joy ride ‘ON the property’ of the friend. The friends mom was suing the woman who’s daughter was killed for $5,000 for repairs to the car!! The poor woman who’s daughter was killed, is standing there in court silently weeping. Judge Judy practically threw the friends mom out after telling her what a horrible person she was.
I can’t stand perfect people.
A well trained dog won't squeeze out the door like that, and certainly won't run into the road if it does.
Dogs sneak out sometimes, even with the most careful of owners.
Not me. The dog owners are responsible. thewy should have had better control over their animals.
“More importantly, why should this guy just suck it up and eat $1,100 bucks worth of damage done to his vehicle and lost wages for something that wasn’t his fault?”
_______________________________________________________________
Why, because he declined the coverage that this incident called for.
When you have an accident, with full coverage, you never are made completely whole. There is never compensation for arranging towing, getting estimates, etc.
It’s a frivolous law suit. The attorney fees will be larger than the amount sued for. And, if he is suing in small claims court, he may, and I stress may, get a judgment; but there is no enforcement of the decree.
As a dog lover (I have a min-pin too), I would support this suit. It is abusive to put your dog in a situation where he could get run over.
He declined coverage of accidents for which he was responsible and no-fault accidents. He's arguing that the dog-owners were responsible for this accident, in which case his insurance status is irrelevant.
According to the ambulance driver and the sheriff, this farmer's geese have been causing trouble before. As a matter of fact, after my son in law was released from the hospital, he and my daughter went to the site to look for my son in law's sunglasses and the geese were still in the road.
My daugher and son in law have a $2500 deductible on their health insurance. My son in law will be unable to do is normal job for many weeks. He is self employed and someone else will have to be hired to do his job.
What should be the farmer's liablity?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.