|By Laura Girresch; Laura Girresch|
The jury awarded
Wells was visiting her sister-in-law,
Wells suffered puncture wounds to her left thumb and multiple fractures and a torn nail bed on her right thumb. Because of a recurrent nail growth, Wells had to have two surgeries after repair in the emergency room.
During the trial, Rakers said, the defense counsel argued that Wells wasn't entitled to damages because state law defined her as the dog's owner in the situation and because she provoked the dog.
Rakers said jury instructions stated that "owner" was defined as "any person having a right of property in an animal, or who keeps or harbors an animal, or who has it in his care, or acts as its custodian." The instructions also said, "'Provoked' means any action or activity, whether intentional or unintentional, which would reasonably be expected to cause a normal animal in similar circumstances to react in a manner similar to that shown by the evidence," Rakers said.
The unanimous verdict came down
Mundwiller said he feared that the injuries, while serious to Wells, wouldn't be seen as serious by others, but he was happy with the outcome.
Rakers said she was glad the jury rejected the defense argument that because Wells was helping a dying dog, she "owned" the dog under
"This was a fair result for Ms. Wells, who was forced to endure almost three years of waiting for resolution," Rakers said.
Plaintiff's Experts: Dr.
Last Pretrial Demand:
Last Pretrial Offer:
|Copyright:||(c) 2011 ProQuest Information and Learning Company; All Rights Reserved.|
We have detected that you are using an adblocker. The revenue we earn by advertisements allows us to publish quality content on InsuranceNewsNet.com.
If you wish to enjoy our content, please disable your adblocker and click the button below.
We hope you choose to whitelist our website and enjoy the content our team works hard to publish.