Dog is back again

[Trish1974]

There is nothing about dogs being kept on owners property, unfortunately.

That is ridiculous!

My husband has already said that he is sure they will sue us if their dog gets killed by AC or us.

If its within the laws I don't see them wasting their time or money on that. Unless they are that hateful and ignorant.

 

[LittleMissCountry]

We are kind of stuck unfortunately. They may lose their dog, but that would most likely result in negative results for us in the long run. I hate to say it, but we may have to consider giving up our chickens. We don't have the money for a legal battle, either way. Lawyers are expensive!

 

[Matilda Belle]

Hmmm, missed all that HOA info while I was composing.

So does the HOA have rules about dogs and the President's dog is in violation and they are not enforcing it? I believe the legal term for that is "arbitrary and capricious".

Time to talk to a lawyer. You may be able to turn this into a profit center......and earn enough equity to clear out pronto.

I'm thinking $100 actual damages and $100,000 punitive damages.

I think you're being facetious a bit? Maybe? IMO, you're not going to get $100,000 punitive damages for chickens unless your entire flock of thousands of exotics is gone. You still have to prove punitive damages. In my unprofessional legal opinion, if you want money, you need to send a certified letter with return receipt to the neighbor with the price for each chicken that is injured or killed.

 

[slordaz]

We went through the HOA contract line by line. There is nothing about dogs being kept on owners property, unfortunately.
My husband has already said that he is sure they will sue us if their dog gets killed by AC or us. They apparently made comments about suing over lots of other piddly things before, so are litigation happy. They couldn't win, but can cost us money in court and lawyer fees. They have plenty of money. I really doubt we could get anything from them other than maybe $100 for the dead chicken. We will document everything anyway and cover our bases.

may not have leash laws but nuisance and animals at large most usually do to besides if it is killing other animals.

 

[LittleMissCountry]

That is ridiculous!

If its within the laws I don't see them wasting their time or money on that. Unless they are that hateful and ignorant.

They may be. So far, based on their actions as HOA president, I would say yes .

 

[LittleMissCountry]

may not have leash laws but nuisance and animals at large most usually do to besides if it is killing other animals.

I will have to ask the AC officer about it.

 

[EggWalrus]

I think you're being facetious a bit? Maybe? IMO, you're not going to get $100,000 punitive damages for chickens unless your entire flock of thousands of exotics is gone. You still have to prove punitive damages. In my unprofessional legal opinion, if you want money, you need to send a certified letter with return receipt to the neighbor with the price for each chicken that is injured or killed.

You're almost correct. You don't prove punitive damages. You prove that another's actions resulted in your loss. When you ask the court to award punitive damages, the punitive damages are a punishment amount above and beyond what your actual losses were. Punitive damages are seldom awarded unless you can establish that the defendant engages in the behavior, that led to the litigation, on a repeated and malicious basis.
If you can find evidence that the hoa president has a history of his dog causing problems in the neighborhood without him ever attempting to remedy the situation (locking the dog up),
You may have good legal standing for a case against him. If he has a long history of negligence by letting his dog run wild and it causing others damages, a judge might levy punitive damages against him as a punishment to motivate a change to his behavior.

 

[Matilda Belle]

You're slight mistaken. You don't prove punitive damages. You prove that another's actions resulted in your loss. When you ask the court to award punitive damages, the punitive damages are a punishment amount above and beyond what your actual losses were. Punitive damages are seldom awarded unless you can establish that the defendant engages in the behavior, that led to the litigation, on a repeated and malicious basis.
If you can find evidence that the hoa president has a history of his dog causing problems in the neighborhood without him ever attempting to remedy the situation (locking the dog up),
You may have good legal standing for a case against him. If he has a long history of negligence by letting his dog run wild and it causing others damages, a judge might levy punitive damages against him as a punishment to motivate a change to his behavior.

Are you a lawyer? Just curious...you don't have to answer.
Perhaps calculations for punitive damages vary from state to state. What I've seen here is courts don't just award an enormous amount of punitive damages unless there is severe pain and suffering (counseling/therapy, loss of work, loss of consortium, severe disability, etc.) "Seldom" as you say. A lot of things are taken into consideration. From what I remember of civil law (it's been awhile), it is a certain statutory calculation. And even if you do get larger than normal judgment on punitive damages, the defendant usually files bankruptcy so it's pointless. Not saying this person doesn't have a case. But $100,000 is unrealistic.

 

[LittleMissCountry]

You're slight mistaken. You don't prove punitive damages. You prove that another's actions resulted in your loss. When you ask the court to award punitive damages, the punitive damages are a punishment amount above and beyond what your actual losses were. Punitive damages are seldom awarded unless you can establish that the defendant engages in the behavior, that led to the litigation, on a repeated and malicious basis.
If you can find evidence that the hoa president has a history of his dog causing problems in the neighborhood without him ever attempting to remedy the situation (locking the dog up),
You may have good legal standing for a case against him. If he has a long history of negligence by letting his dog run wild and it causing others damages, a judge might levy punitive damages against him as a punishment to motivate a change to his behavior.

I will have to ask around and see. I haven't heard any other people complain, and when he came over the first time, and killed our chicken, the guy acted embarrassed and was apologetic. He said the dog hadn't gotten out from the wireless fence in years. I hadn't seen the dog out before the chicken killing. This time he was snarky, so maybe he was on the defensive since he knows what could happen.

 

[slordaz]

I will have to ask the AC officer about it.

Are you a lawyer? Just curious...you don't have to answer.
Perhaps calculations for punitive damages vary from state to state. What I've seen here is courts don't just award an enormous amount of punitive damages unless there is severe pain and suffering (counseling/therapy, loss of work, loss of consortium, severe disability, etc.) "Seldom" as you say. A lot of things are taken into consideration. From what I remember of civil law (it's been awhile), it is a certain statutory calculation. And even if you do get larger than normal judgment on punitive damages, the defendant usually files bankruptcy so it's pointless. Not saying this person doesn't have a case. But $100,000 is unrealistic.

That they do, one thing you should always remember is they can vay from state to state