Dogs On Leashes
#1
Posted 18 December 2006 - 07:04 PM
Folsom Municiple Code does require that a dog be on a leash and in the owners control at all times when not at home.
RFK
#2
Posted 18 December 2006 - 07:15 PM
#3
Posted 18 December 2006 - 09:51 PM
Basically, a woman had two dogs that were not on a leash, and she was down the road from them (it didn't look like she was trying to catch up until one alsmot got hit, she was walking at a leisurely pace with her husband and grandson). One dog ran across the street and a community service Folsom PD car had to swerve to miss it. There was a big truck in front of me, he saw the second dog last minute and slammed on his brakes, I had to slam on mine, but my car didn't stop in time.
My compact car is even more compact now, the woman finally caught up to her dogs, called them over, put the leashes on, then walked away (according to the officer that pulled up, he got her info). She didn't want to talk to us as a witness to the accident, and said that it wasn't her fault that the dogs weren't on a leash.
My neck and back are a little sore, but I'm going to a massage therapist on Friday, so hopefully it'll help. What a way to end the school year and start Christmas (oops, I mean Winter break).
RFK
#4
Posted 18 December 2006 - 10:27 PM
RFK
#5
Posted 18 December 2006 - 10:30 PM
Plus I'm worried about you -- I hope your soreness goes away. Keep us posted on how you are doing.
That lady picked the wrong time to have her dogs loose, with the Folsom PD right there. I'm sure she'll get cited and I wouldn't be surprised if the insurance companies go after her.
#6
Posted 18 December 2006 - 11:15 PM
Plus I'm worried about you -- I hope your soreness goes away. Keep us posted on how you are doing.
That lady picked the wrong time to have her dogs loose, with the Folsom PD right there. I'm sure she'll get cited and I wouldn't be surprised if the insurance companies go after her.
One nice thing is not having to go thru the rental car deal. We just got a new car so we can transport our dogs around and go up to the snow in.
As for your concern, I appreciate it a great deal. On Friday I'm going to get a massage, so hopefully if the soreness isn't gone by then, it will be after.
The interesting thing 'bout the community serivce PD car, they didn't stop to talk with the lady. The kept on driving. Right after the incident, another PD car came driving by (on patrol I think) and he saw the accident and came over, then went to go talk to the woman before she walked away (she was already at the end of the street by the time that second PD car came).
#7
Posted 19 December 2006 - 12:35 AM
Wasn't her fault? Did the dogs grow opposable thumbs while on their daily walk and remove the leashes themselves?
I'm sorry this happened to you and hope your pain subsides quickly. I'm glad she was still there when the officer pulled up and hope she is held criminally accountable for her actions (or lack thereof).
Tailored Resume Services
(916) 984-0855
Volunteer, Court Appointed Special Advocate for Sacramento CASA * I Am for the Child
Making a Difference in the Life of Abused and Neglected Children in Foster Care
http://www.sacramentocasa.org/
I am only one, but I am one. I cannot do everything, but I can do something. And I will not let what I cannot do interfere with what I can do. ~ Edward Everett Hale
"How wonderful it is that nobody need wait a single moment before starting to improve the world." ~ Anne Frank
#8
Posted 19 December 2006 - 08:01 AM
My neck and back are a little sore, but I'm going to a massage therapist on Friday, so hopefully it'll help. What a way to end the school year and start Christmas (oops, I mean Winter break).
Very sorry to hear about your accident, looks like your car really got hurt and it sounds like you did too. Hope you heal quick dude.
If that lady thinks she wasn't at fault then she better continue to think that when her dogs get run over and killed the next time they roam loose like that.
You should get her info and pursue legal action to make her pay at the very least for your insurance deductable
Travel, food and drink blog by Dave - http://davestravels.tv
#9
Posted 19 December 2006 - 09:19 AM
My compact car is even more compact now, the woman finally caught up to her dogs, called them over, put the leashes on, then walked away (according to the officer that pulled up, he got her info). She didn't want to talk to us as a witness to the accident, and said that it wasn't her fault that the dogs weren't on a leash.
My neck and back are a little sore, but I'm going to a massage therapist on Friday, so hopefully it'll help. What a way to end the school year and start Christmas (oops, I mean Winter break).
I bet she'd have a different attitude if one or both of her dogs got run over. That sucks swmr. Also sucks that this lady risks her dogs' lives like that.
#10
Posted 19 December 2006 - 09:22 AM
I'm sorry this happened to you and hope your pain subsides quickly. I'm glad she was still there when the officer pulled up and hope she is held criminally accountable for her actions (or lack thereof).
It wasn't her fault. While the dogs may've caused sudden braking, the story I read from swmr (and the photo) indicates it was a rear-ender. Calif's basic speed law says you shouldn't drive your car so fast that you can't brake before hitting the car ahead of you. So in a rear-ender it is always the fault of the driver in the rear. Sorry to break that to you swmr.
Nonetheless we should all keep our dogs on leashes.
#11
Posted 19 December 2006 - 09:30 AM
Nonetheless we should all keep our dogs on leashes.
That is absolutely false. I used to work as a claims adjuster - this is one of the most common mistakenly held beliefs.
#13
Posted 19 December 2006 - 10:48 AM
Sorry dude, the code reads:
No person shall drive a vehicle upon a highway at a speed greater than is reasonable or prudent having due regard for weather, visibility, the traffic on, and the surface and width of, the highway, and in no event at a speed which endangers the safety of persons or property.
That does nothing to restrict fault to one particular party. For example, if someone pulls out of gas station unsafely into traffic and is rear-ended, physical damage, braking distance and witness accounts could all be used to easily assign fault to the party rear-ended, not the party that that did the rear ending - especially if that person was driving safely.
In fact, by the VC you noted, an unsafe speed could be too slow, meaning that driving 5 mph on a highway and getting rear-ended could be that driver's fault as well. There are countless circumstances where the person rear-ended could be assigned fault.
Al, you're 100% wrong here. Sorry, that's just the truth.
#14
Posted 19 December 2006 - 11:01 AM
#15
Posted 19 December 2006 - 11:17 AM
No person shall drive a vehicle upon a highway at a speed greater than is reasonable or prudent having due regard for weather, visibility, the traffic on, and the surface and width of, the highway, and in no event at a speed which endangers the safety of persons or property.
That does nothing to restrict fault to one particular party. For example, if someone pulls out of gas station unsafely into traffic and is rear-ended, physical damage, braking distance and witness accounts could all be used to easily assign fault to the party rear-ended, not the party that that did the rear ending - especially if that person was driving safely.
In fact, by the VC you noted, an unsafe speed could be too slow, meaning that driving 5 mph on a highway and getting rear-ended could be that driver's fault as well. There are countless circumstances where the person rear-ended could be assigned fault.
Al, you're 100% wrong here. Sorry, that's just the truth.
Your example does prove the exception to the rule though there are not "countless" exceptions. I'm not 100% wrong though, and in swmr's situation he would still be deemed at fault.
0 user(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users