[Casyimipist]

Just tonight I used the example of a mini poodle being vicious on my facebook page, and then I coincidentally saw this post. It all started when I posted the following:
Failure to restrain dog= $250,000 in damages...ouch...

While Tyler Ellerson, 19, was at the home of his friend, Christopher Sears, he petted Sears’s cockapoo. The dog bit Ellerson’s face, causing a deep, jagged puncture wound. He required stitches and plastic surgery and has been left with residual scarring. His medical expenses were about $23,000.

Ellerson sued Sears’s parents, alleging the defendants failed to restrain their vicious dog in light of his known aggressive tendencies. The defendants argued that their dog was not vicious and that Ellerson assumed the risk of injury. Suit did not claim lost income.

After a jury found the defendants liable, the parties settled for $250,000.

Citation: Ellerson v. Sears, No. 13877/09 (N.Y., Suffolk Co. Sup. July 13, 2011).


My conclusion to my friend was:

it doesn't matter what kind of dog it is in order to be held liable for damages. The owner of a miniature poodle who latches on and tears off the bottom lip of a little girl will have the same liability as the owner of a bigger dog who bites in most cases. The jury is only allowed to award based on damages, and there is a max. Therefore, the type of dog is irrelevant. All dog owners need to restrain their dogs if they wish to protect themselves from getting sued.