Free for a limited time.
If a person could not take care of a pet, a veterinarian would speak out. If a pet was living in a place where it could not get something that it needed, a veterinarian would speak out. Clearly there are circumstances when a veterinarian would speak out.
But would it be only in defense of a pet? What if a pet presented a danger to its owner? What if a pet presented a danger to children living in the home of the pet's owner? Wouldn't the veterinarian's greater knowledge of the danger, and the veterinarian's role as the owner's trusted advisor, require the veterinarian to speak out?
The enlightened view is that a person has a duty to speak out when the person has advanced learning or experience and sees a danger to other people. At the very least, it's a moral duty, a requirement of the heart, of the soul, of a person's humanity.
Because a veterinarian clearly has a moral duty to speak out if a pet presents a danger to its owner or its owner's children, he or she should get "A Veterinarian's Letter to a Dog Owner."
It tells the client that the veterinarian appreciates being the owner's trusted advisor, and relishes the opportunity to serve both the client and the client's dog.
It then goes on to explain that the dog is a high risk animal, and that similar dogs have caused substantial bodily injuries to their owners, family members of their owners, and others.
The letter ends with suggestions for reducing the risk, and an offer to discuss the matter further. And there are additional, optional provisions that you can add, covering:
- The meaning of "high risk animal"
- Where to learn more about your high risk animal
- Warning about civil and criminal liability, and sanctions
- Agreement that client will pay for damages
- Defending your dog
There is no doubt that a veterinarian who sees a danger to a family because of a high risk animal should warn them in a message that is clear and yet gentle and positive. Nobody will be able to say that you failed to warn them after they receive this letter.
Get a copy. Use it as it, revise it, ask your lawyer to revise it. Speak out with it.
Eliminate the risk of a lawsuit when a dangerous dog is being trained.
Gives peace of mind to a dog owner who wants to give his dog a second chance without the risk of getting sued by the trainer.
A dog that bit a person might not have a vicious temperament. With the right trainer, the dog might be rehabilitated. If the dog injures the trainer before its aggression is eliminated, however, the dog owner might find himself facing a large claim for compensation. This Waiver of Liability by a Dog Trainer prevents this from happening by confirming that the trainer knows the dog can bite, that the dog owner has not misrepresented the dog as being safe, and that the trainer assumes the risk of getting injured.
Helps protect the trainer from liability and makes the client responsible for the trainer's medical payments.
A dog trainer's liability for dog bites to another person arises when someone is injured during training, or by a dog that the trainer certified as being safe.
During a training session, it is foreseeable that someone other than the trainer could be injured. The possible victims include the dog owner and his guests, other dog owners and their guests, and dogs belonging to other persons. Any injury will be laid at the feet of the trainer because he assumes custody and control of the dog during the session. One of his implied duties is to conduct the session in a manner that ensures adequate safety for other people and their animals.
Additionally, training a dog known to be vicious imposes further duties such as the obligation to warn those present and segregate the dog from people and other dogs.
Breach of one of these duties would expose the trainer to liability for negligence. There is no statutory limit to the compensation that a victim of dog trainer negligence may be entitled to receive. For that reason, the trainer's legal duties and his clients' remedies for alleged breach of those duties should be circumscribed in a written contract.
This Dog Training Agreement describes the goals of the training, gives the number and dates of the training sessions, sets forth whether the sessions will be private and where they will take place, establishes the amount of compensation, confirms that the dog owner's representation that it has not bitten anyone or been declared dangerous or vicious by the authorities, and provides that if the dog injures the trainer the client will pay reasonable medical bills and compensation for loss of income.
This Release of All Claims is essential for settling a claim based on personal injuries or property damage caused by your dog. After signing this Release and receiving your money, the other party will not be entitled to more even if his or her injuries turn out to be worse than originally thought or the amount of money turns out to be insufficient.
One of the best reasons for getting this Release is that it will protect your dog as well as you. The generic releases available over the Internet might (or might not) be good enough to prevent a further claim against you, but they do not exonerate your dog. If you use a generic release, the other party can still make trouble for your dog, complaining to the animal control authorities and saying that you have effectively admitted the dog is vicious. This Release specifically eliminates that possibility.
This Release works perfectly in California. In other states the California law which is quoted in paragraph 4 of the Release should be replaced by whatever your state requires or lawyers in your state recommend. States are different when it comes to injury releases, so you should use one that is written for the state where the accident happened. You also have the option of getting this one, taking out the California reference in paragraph 4 and adding language appropriate to your state.
This Transfer of Ownership can protect yourself from getting sued after you give your dog away. It tells the other party that your dog has the potential to hurt someone, and confirms that you no longer will have ownership or liability for whatever the dog does. It also negates a number of things that could be used as evidence against you in case there are future problems with the dog.
Don't leave to chance what might happen in the future. Signing the other party's document probably won't protect you in any way. Having nothing in writing certainly leaves you open to a future claim against you. This simple letter agreement will give you peace of mind!
Download this file in rich text format which works in any word processor.
A Complaint that will not only stick, but frighten, backed by Points and Authorities. Here’s the quickest, easiest and cheapest way to kick off your dog bite cases, big and small. You get the following causes of action:
- Liability Based on the Dog Bite Statute
- General Negligence
- Negligence Per Se Based on Violation of the Leash Law
- Common Law Liability for Dangerous Propensity
- Landlord Liability for Tenant’s Dog
- Bystander Liability
- Battery (with Punitive Damages)
Every allegation of each cause of action is included, and every one is backed with Points and Authorities that have been tested in court and won the day.
This Complaint is used by Attorney Kenneth M. Phillips, the author of Dog Bite Law (dogbitelaw.com) in most of his California dog bite cases. It will save you many hours of research prior to filing, and you will have peace of mind knowing that you covered all the bases.
No demurrer against it has ever been sustained, or motion to strike granted. If the defense attorney in your case attempts any such thing, the Points and Authorities for your opposition memorandum are right here.
Strategic considerations - why you need this
Attorney Kenneth Phillips has been filing dog bite cases for 26 years. For some reason, defense lawyers occasionally file demurrers and motions to strike against his Complaint. Not a single one has ever been granted. The reason should be obvious: he does nothing but represent the families of people killed by dogs, and dog bite victims who are disfigured or permanently disabled. So he knows what to allege, what to avoid and how to argue, including not just the Points and Authorities but also the policy considerations that win the day.
The Undemurable Complaint has three killer causes of action in addition to the four basic ones that you should include for almost every case. The killers are –
- Battery (and punitive damages)
- Landlord Liability
- Bystander Emotional Distress
The Battery cause of action, with its allegations supporting punitive damages, gets plenty of attention all the time! Phillips uses this legal ground when the defendant has done something out of the ordinary such as promising to keep the dog in a cage because of its tendency to bite but then letting the dog out despite knowing that the victim was present. The allegations can be tailored to fit a number of situations that arise all too frequently.
Landlord Liability is extremely important because renters who own dogs usually do not have renters insurance. This means you have to consider other targets who can provide compensation, and the first on the list is the landlord. But alleging a dog bite case against a landlord is a tricky and precise task because California courts require a plaintiff to allege that the landlord had the right kind of knowledge of the danger. Just about any time you allege landlord liability you're going to face a demurrer and thus will need our Points and Authorities.
The four basic causes of action that you should always try to include are –
- Statutory Strict Liability
- Negligence Per Se
- Common Law Liability for Scienter
You're wrong if you think you can get away with just alleging statutory strict liability pursuant to the California dog bite statute. All three of the articles that Phillips has written for Trial Magazine, as well as his seminar called Tips and Tricks for Dog Bite Lawyers, warn against relying on strict liability because (a) jurors who own dogs hate it, (b) jurors who don't own dogs think it's a clever loophole exploited by a greedy lawyer and thus are not motivated by it, (c) judges will not admit evidence of wrongdoing because it is irrelevant in a strict liability case, (d) defense attorneys are aware you can't get your evidence of wrongdoing in front of the jury so they admit liability to make you and the plaintiff look like you're trying to get too much money, and (e) you will lose the case if the jury believes that the injury was caused by a scratch rather than a bite, or if you cannot prove that the defendant was the owner of the dog. Therefore you need to allege negligence and common law liability for scienter (i.e., the dog had the dangerous propensity to bite).
Negligence Per Se is based on the violation of an animal control ordinance such as the "leash law." Most attorneys don't realize that about half of the leashes sold to dog owners result in prima facie leash law violations because these leashes are more than 6 feet in length. Also, common occurrences like tying up a dog, letting a child walk a dog, and owning too many dogs are all violations of typical animal control ordinances. So this is a powerful ground because it allows you to reach the "reptile brain" that fears going out onto the street and getting attacked by a dog. But when you allege Negligence Per Se, expect a demurrer on the spurious ground that it isn't a separate cause of action. Win it with our Points and Authorities.
Cut, paste and win! Download now and take the night off!
Download this file in rich text format which works in any word processor.