. .

Invest in your success.
JVRA helps lawyers win cases by providing critical information you can use to establish precedent, determine demand and win arguments.

ARTICLE ID 195778

– Dog Attack – Plaintiff alleged he was injured when defendants' pit bull attacked he and his dog on his own property – Shoulder injuries requiring surgery – Permanent loss of function of right arm.

Plymouth County, MA

In this matter, the plaintiff alleged that the defendant dog owners were negligent and responsible for the injuries he sustained when he was attacked by the defendants’ roaming pit bull and fell to the ground. As a result of the incident, the plaintiff suffered injuries to his shoulder, which required surgery. The defendants denied any wrongdoing and disputed causation and damages.

The male plaintiff was the owner of a dog. On the evening of this incident, the plaintiff was on his own property and was bringing his own dog into the house. While on his own deck, the plaintiff was attacked by the defendants’ dog, a pit bull, which was loose and wandered onto the plaintiff’s deck. In an attempt to fend off the dog’s attack, the plaintiff fell to the ground. The plaintiff suffered an injury to his right arm and shoulder. He was diagnosed with an aggravation and re-tear to his right rotator cuff. The plaintiff was required to undergo surgery to attempt to repair his rotator cuff injury. Ultimately, due to the lack of successful surgery, he underwent a shoulder replacement procedure. Despite the surgical intervention, the plaintiff suffered a permanent injury to his right arm and shoulder, which resulted in a permanent loss of substantial use of his right arm. The plaintiff brought suit against the defendants – the owners of the dog – alleging that the dog was not properly restrained, regularly roamed the neighborhood and had a history of being aggressive.

The defendants denied the allegations and any negligence or liability to the plaintiff. The defendants maintained that any injuries suffered by the plaintiff were as a result of his own negligence. The defendants further disputed causation and damages. The defendants maintained that the plaintiff’s injury was pre-existing, and was not related to any incident involving their dog, and the plaintiff’s medical records did not disclose any reference to the alleged attack until several months after the incident.

The matter proceeded to trial.At the conclusion of the trial, the jury deliberated and returned its verdict in favor of the defendants. The jury declined to find causation. No damages were awarded.

To read the full article, please login to your account or purchase

5 ways to win with JVRA

JVRA gives you jurisdiction-specific, year-round insight into the strategies, arguments and tactics that win. Successful attorneys come to the table prepared and use JVRA to:

  1. Determine if a case is winnable and recovery amounts.
  2. Determine reasonable demand for a case early on.
  3. Support a settlement demand by establishing precedent.
  4. Research trial strategies, tactics and arguments.
  5. Defeat or support post-trial motions through past case histories.

Try JVRA for a day or a month, or sign up for our deluxe Litigation Support Plan and put the intelligence of JVRA to work for all of your clients. See our subscription plans.


Your cart is empty
Let Our expert Researchers Do The Searching For You! Pro Search Service