The Reporter 1/20/2010
“Thomas Newell, a personal injury lawyer who specializes in cases involving dog bites, car accidents, and slip and falls, said that under state dog law, since the attack occurred inside a home and the dog was confined, there is no violation.
He said a lawsuit could be viable, depending on the outcome of three avenues.
If Votta is proven not to have renter’s insurance, then the fault falls on the property owner.
If it can be proven that the property owner knew there were prior vicious acts of the dog and did nothing to remedy it, then fault is on the property owner.
However, if the owner did not have knowledge, then the argument falls on what exclusions are on the insurance contract for the property that exclude tenant-related negligent acts.
“If the victim comes to me and all three avenues are exhausted – there’s no insurance for the owner, the landlord had no prior knowledge and there is an exclusion on the insurance for the property excluding negligent acts on the property, there’s nothing I can do,” Newell said.”
