My Landlord Injured My Dog While Installing a Refrigerator When No One Was Home

[DmOneyBK]

What is the name of your state (only U.S. law)? New York State
A few weeks ago me and my roommate were scheduled to have a new refrigerator installed. I have a dog (a toy poodle) which my land lord knows about. I scheduled an appointment for 4:30PM so me or my roommate could be home to keep my dog out of everyones way (she likes to run up and say hello to people). On the day of the installation i was running 10 minutes late, at 4:00PM I texted my landlord telling him to wait for me. He said he had already let himself in because my roommate called him earlier in the day and told him that he would be home between 2:30PM and 5PM and the installation was almost complete. My roommate wasn't home, but my landlord let himself in anyway. I asked him if my dog was any trouble, he said she ran into my room as soon as him and the delivery men entered my apartment. By the time i got home the landlord had already left (i don't know how long it takes to install a refrigerator but it would seem like he let himself in way earlier then he said he did) and my dog was nowhere to be found. After i called her name a few times she finally limped out from under my bed, he front paw was bleeding and she looked terrified. Upon closer inspection, i realized, to my horror, that her paw was broken. I rushed her to an emergency vet clinic. The final bill came to $5000. The vet said there was no way the injury could have been self inflicted and blunt force was the cause of the injury. I called my landlord and asked him what had happened. He said that when he came in to my apartment the dog ran into my room and he heard a loud yelp. After I told him about the broken paw and the $5000 bill, he said he was sorry and he would cover some of the cost but he could not afford to cover the full $5000 (he hasn't made an offer but it will probably be less then half). He also said that because my roommate told him he that he would be home between 2:30 and 5:00PM that this basically gave him permission to let himself in between those hours. Even though the whole point of having me or my roommate in the apartment during the installation was to make sure my dog was ok. Now my question is, though i wasn't home when this happened, and i cant outright prove that he injured my dog (though my dog has never injured herself before), and though my roommate told him he'd be home and wasn't, can i still take him to small claims court to recover my losses? Was he in his right to enter my apartment without my permission because he assumed someone would be home before the agreed upon time? What are my options here? I really don't have the kind of money to loose even a $1000 let alone $5000. This whole thing has left me nearly broke. Should I take what he's offering? Or does it make sense to take him to court to recover what i lost? And what are my chances of winning this if I do go to court? Thanks in advance to anyone who replies.

 

[OHRoadwarrior]

You do not appear to have any evidence of wrong doing. You have no admission of guilt. You were properly notified and landlord had permission to enter. You failed to properly secure the dog prior to landlord arriving. Take what he gives and go on with life.

 

[sandyclaus]

What is the name of your state (only U.S. law)? New York State
A few weeks ago me and my roommate were scheduled to have a new refrigerator installed. I have a dog (a toy poodle) which my land lord knows about. I scheduled an appointment for 4:30PM so me or my roommate could be home to keep my dog out of everyones way (she likes to run up and say hello to people). On the day of the installation i was running 10 minutes late, at 4:00PM I texted my landlord telling him to wait for me. He said he had already let himself in because my roommate called him earlier in the day and told him that he would be home between 2:30PM and 5PM and the installation was almost complete. My roommate wasn't home, but my landlord let himself in anyway. I asked him if my dog was any trouble, he said she ran into my room as soon as him and the delivery men entered my apartment. By the time i got home the landlord had already left (i don't know how long it takes to install a refrigerator but it would seem like he let himself in way earlier then he said he did) and my dog was nowhere to be found. After i called her name a few times she finally limped out from under my bed, he front paw was bleeding and she looked terrified. Upon closer inspection, i realized, to my horror, that her paw was broken. I rushed her to an emergency vet clinic. The final bill came to $5000. The vet said there was no way the injury could have been self inflicted and blunt force was the cause of the injury. I called my landlord and asked him what had happened. He said that when he came in to my apartment the dog ran into my room and he heard a loud yelp. After I told him about the broken paw and the $5000 bill, he said he was sorry and he would cover some of the cost but he could not afford to cover the full $5000 (he hasn't made an offer but it will probably be less then half). He also said that because my roommate told him he that he would be home between 2:30 and 5:00PM that this basically gave him permission to let himself in between those hours. Even though the whole point of having me or my roommate in the apartment during the installation was to make sure my dog was ok. Now my question is, though i wasn't home when this happened, and i cant outright prove that he injured my dog (though my dog has never injured herself before), and though my roommate told him he'd be home and wasn't, can i still take him to small claims court to recover my losses? Was he in his right to enter my apartment without my permission because he assumed someone would be home before the agreed upon time? What are my options here? I really don't have the kind of money to loose even a $1000 let alone $5000. This whole thing has left me nearly broke. Should I take what he's offering? Or does it make sense to take him to court to recover what i lost? And what are my chances of winning this if I do go to court? Thanks in advance to anyone who replies.

I'm sorry about the dog, but $5,000 for a broken paw? Really? What kind of treatment was administered?

How do you know that the LL/their agent caused the injury? How do you know it wasn't your roommate and they took off after causing the injury?

If your dog's safety was so important, I would agree that you should have been there to secure the dog safely away where it wouldn't be underfoot and potentially in the way, and not assumed that your roommate would be there if you couldn't be. The blame here should be on your roommate who granted the LL permission to enter in your absence, and they weren't there when THEY promised to be, either.

Take what the LL is offering and consider yourself lucky that they are willing to contribute towards the vet bills at all.

 

[swalsh411]

All of this could have been prevented with a $40 dog crate. (which every dog owner should have, even if they don't regularly crate)

 

[sandyclaus]

All of this could have been prevented with a $40 dog crate. (which every dog owner should have, even if they don't regularly crate)

An EXCELLENT idea, IMHO. A dog in a crate wouldn't have been an issue regardless of whether or not OP or their roommate were able to make it back in time for the delivery/install.

 

[TigerD]

All of this could have been prevented with a $40 dog crate. (which every dog owner should have, even if they don't regularly crate)

While I have a real hard time accepting the assertion that a "toy poodle" is a dog, crating a dog all day seems rather inhumane to me.

However, I agree with the others that $5,000 is excessive. That's roughly 3.5 times the replacement cost for a pure bred animal.

DC

 

[DmOneyBK]

Thanks to everyone for responding. The only reason I scheduled an appointment was because I wanted someone to be home when the refrigerator was installed, specifically because i wanted to avoid this type of incident with my dog. If i knew no one could be home at the time, i would have locked the dog in my room. I honestly never thought that A) My roommate would call him on the day of the delivery, give him a time and then just leave without tell me or the landlord (he never told me he called the landlord in the first place) and B)the landlord would just let himself in without anyone being in the apartment. The landlord also refuses to discuss this matter through text or email, and only wants to talk on the phone. I'm assuming this is to make sure that he's not leaving a written record (he claims his english isn't good enough to type his responses). I mean even if he has the right to enter my apartment when i'm not there, he cant just damage things around my house. If i came home and the apartment was trashed would i have no recourse to legal action? Is the fact that i texted him that i was running late at 4:00PM, then got home around 4:40PM, noticed my dogs injury at 4:50PM, called a cab at about 4:51 and was at the emergency clinic by 5:20PM enough evidence that someone other then me injured my dog? He has admitted to being the only person in my apartment. Is it possible that a judge could think that i got home, hurt my dog and then tried to blame it on my landlord? That dog is like a child to me, i don't know if thats a defense, but shouldn't the fact that i just dropped all my savings on her medical bills attest to that? I honestly cant even make the rent this month, and as far as i can tell none of this was my fault.

PS. My dog required a ton of emergency medical treatment, including staying at the clinic for a few days for recovery. The follow ups, including the removal of the cast ect. came to a total of $5000. The dog isn't just some item to me that i can just toss away because it costs more to repair then to get a new one. Please be empathetic with me on this.

PPS. My roommate is a vegan who loves animals, i don't think he'd hurt my dog, even by accident and then try to lie about it.

 

[quincy]

Thanks to everyone for responding. The only reason I scheduled an appointment was because I wanted someone to be home when the refrigerator was installed, specifically because i wanted to avoid this type of incident with my dog. If i knew no one could be home at the time, i would have locked the dog in my room. I honestly never thought that A) My roommate would call him on the day of the delivery, give him a time and then just leave without tell me or the landlord (he never told me he called the landlord in the first place) and B)the landlord would just let themselves in without anyone being in the apartment. The landlord also refuses to discuss this matter through text or email, and only wants to talk on the phone. I'm assuming this is to make sure that he's not leaving a written record (he claims his english isn't good enough to type his responses). I mean even if he has the right to enter my apartment when i'm not there, he cant just damage things around my house. If i came home and the apartment was trashed would i have no recourse to legal action? Is the fact that i texted him that i was running late at 4:00PM, then got home around 4:40PM, noticed my dogs injury at 4:50PM, called a cab at about 4:51 and was at the emergency clinic by 5:20PM enough evidence that someone other then me injured my dog? He has admitted to being the only person in my apartment. Is it possible that a judge could think that i got home, hurt my dog and then tried to blame it on my landlord? That dog is like a child to me, i don't know if thats a defense, but shouldn't the fact that i just dropped all my savings on her medical bills attest to that? I honestly cant even make the rent this month, and as far as i can tell none of this was my fault.

I think you have a problem of proof, DmOneyBK.

Certainly it appears that whoever installed the refrigerator may have been responsible for your dog's injury, but so could have your roommate - or your dog might have somehow injured himself in some way. If your landlord offers to pay anything at all, I think you may want to count yourself lucky.

You could always call an attorney in your area to see if s/he thinks you have any legal ground to stand on, but I am not seeing any from what you have posted here.

I am sorry for your dog's injury. I hope he recovers quickly.

 

[TigerD]

PS. My dog required a ton of emergency medical treatment, including staying at the clinic for a few days for recovery. The follow ups, including the removal of the cast ect. came to a total of $5000. The dog isn't just some item to me that i can just toss away because it costs more to repair then to get a new one. Please be empathetic with me on this.

I understand your feelings. But the dog is a possession and you may have a hard time convincing someone that a person should be held liable for more than the replacement cost of something they damaged.

DC

 

[mmmagique]

It wouldn't hurt to go to small claims court. The landlord did admit that the dog came running to him, let out a yelp, and then ran away. The only thing you need to do in small claims court is to have the judge believe your story a smidge more than the landlord's story. And prove your damages. (which may be the more difficult but not impossible thing to do.)

I doubt you'll lose out on the thousand or so your ll is offering by taking this to court, and you do stand to gain more.

 

[Astrolink]

Not related to the legal aspect of this poster, but my toy poodle broke his leg in 2013. The entire cost, including cast, removal, ect. was $1600. 2/3 of the "financial aspect" of this case is the OP didn't spend 5 seconds looking for a better price. When my dog was limping and it appeared his leg might be broken, a total of 5 minutes was used to look up vets in the area and call 3 of them to get an estimate over the phone.

 

[You Are Guilty]

Yeah, for $5k, I hope the dog got a bionic replacement leg. Even if OP were to win in small claims (don't ask me how without any proof), there is no way a judge would ever award more than the value of the dog for "repairs", much less several multiples of that amount.

A "new" toy poodle is what, $1500? Let's assume one leg is worth 25% of the value of the dog (this valuation does ignore the who head to tail part of the dog but whatever, it's my hypo). That leaves ~$375 in damages. Anything the LL voluntarily provides over that seems to be a good outcome.

Will suing the LL cause them to raise their offer? Maybe.

Will suing the LL get a court to award $5k in damages? Even if some crazy SC judge says "yes", not if the LL knows what an appeal is.

And a final thought on the proof problem - what kind of fracture was it? Certain types are almost impossible to happen "naturally" and are typically the result of abuse/human interaction (e.g., radial fractures). If it was one of those, it might be enough to sway a judge on liability. (The damages aspect is still going to be tough, regardless).

 

[Mass_Shyster]

there is no way a judge would ever award more than the value of the dog for "repairs", much less several multiples of that amount.

Maybe your (NY) judges won't, but ours (MA) will.

See http://masscases.com/cases/distapp/2012/2012massappdiv142.html

IRWIN v. DERESH, 2012 Mass. App. Div. 142 (2012)

PIERCE, J. The issue on this appeal is whether the owner of a dog, attacked and injured by a second dog, may recover resulting veterinary costs from the second dog’s owner. After a jury-waived trial and upon finding the defendant-appellants, Irina Deresh, d/b/a Boston Kennels, and Arkady Degtiarov (“defendants”), liable under G.L. c. 140, § 155, the trial court awarded damages to the plaintiffs, Marcia and John Irwin (“plaintiffs”), in the amount of their veterinary costs. [Note 4] The defendants contend that the measure of damages should not have been the cost of treating the injured dog, but rather the diminution in value of the dog as a result of the attack. The defendants further argue that the maximum recovery available to the plaintiffs is the market value of the dog. We disagree with both contentions, and uphold the damages awarded by the trial court.

 

[Just Blue]

Maybe your (NY) judges won't, but ours (MA) will.

See http://masscases.com/cases/distapp/2012/2012massappdiv142.html

But OP is in N.Y.

 

[quincy]

Maybe your (NY) judges won't, but ours (MA) will.

See http://masscases.com/cases/distapp/2012/2012massappdiv142.html

The decision in Massachusetts is not unlike decisions coming out of courts in several states now. Courts today are more willing to look at a pet as more than property, with new laws enacted that allow for this view.

Again, though, proof in DmOneyBK's described situation seems to preclude full recovery of vet costs from the landlord (or, for that matter, any recovery not voluntarily offered).


edit to add:
New York has recognized in court decisions that pets have value beyond that of inanimate property.

In Corso v Crawford Dog and Cat Hospital, Inc, 415 NYS 2d, 182 NY City Civ Ct (1979), the court's decision recognized a pet is not comparable to unliving property.

In Brousseau v Rosenthal, 443 NYS 2d 285, NY City Civ Ct (1980), court acknowledged even a mutt has value based on its worth as a companion.

In Raymond v Lachmann, 695 NYS 2d 308 NY App Div (1999), a cat custody case was determined based on a "best for cat" standard.

In Travis v Murray, _ NYS 2d _ 2013 WL 6246374, NY Sup Ct (2013), custody of dog was decided based on a "best for all concerned" standard - sole residential custody was granted.

A link to the Travis v Murray NY Supreme Court case: http://caselaw.findlaw.com/ny-supreme-court/1651517.html