The Associated Press is reporting that the Indiana Supreme Court has granted transfer to review a decision of the Court of Appeals that overruled a trial court judgment in favor of the City of Evansville Animal Control.
The Court of Appeals case was Davis v. Animal Control – City of Evansville (pdf), a 2 to 1 decision in favor of overturning the trial court decision (h/t Indiana Law Blog). At issue was whether Animal Control’s failure to abide by the city ordinance’s and designate a private individual’s dog to be a “dangerous animal” led to the dog biting the Plaintiff’s child and was something the Plaintiff could sue the city for.
The City argued that it was immune under the Indiana Tort Claim Act’s law enforcement immunity provisions which prevents liability by a governmental entity for failing to enforce the law. If this weren’t in place, you’d see lawsuits against the police department every time they failed to enforce the law against, for example, battery. Laws aren’t insurance against bad acts by private individuals. The Court of Appeals offered some (in my mind) muddled reasoning for holding that designation of the dog as a dangerous animal wasn’t part of the enforcement mechanism for the Evansville animal control ordinance. Judge Kirsch advanced this argument in his dissent.
If the Court of Appeals decision stands, it might be financially responsible for municipalities to get rid of their animal control ordinances altogether if they stand to be liable to pay for dog bites where a plaintiff can convince a jury the municipality slipped up on following the procedures set forth in the ordinance.
“If this weren’t in place, you’d see lawsuits against the police department every time they failed to enforce the law against, for example, battery.”
Obviously such laws are needed.
On the other hand, how do we protect ourelves when gov’t official truly are negligent?
Buy insurance?
This is interesting because one time I was called to jury duty,the case was about tree cropping over a fence border and one neighbor was suing the other neighbor for damages from a botched job. During voir dire I wondered out loud why the property insurance didnt cover the damages.I was not chosen for the jury,but that was not my intent,and maybe my question wasn’t the reason,but Ive always wondered.
Yeah, when it comes to property insurance, they have ways of not paying, so beware, especially if you live in close proximity of your neighbors, even ones you think are nice.