Go Back  FlyerTalk Forums > Miles&Points > Hotels and Places to Stay > Marriott | Marriott Bonvoy
Reload this Page >

Bitten by guest's dog in Marriott lobby

Bitten by guest's dog in Marriott lobby

Old Mar 5, 2020, 8:15 pm
  #151  
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Redondo Beach, CA USA
Programs: UA 1KMM, Bonvoy LTE+A, HH D, Nat'l EE, Hertz Plat, Avis PC
Posts: 3,753
Thanks for keeping us posted, deac83. I'm glad you didn't get seriously hurt, and this is probably going to go down as one of those stories you tell your friends and family at parties for years to come. But I'm still ticked off at that dog owner for being the kind of selfish, oblivious jerk that seem to be taking over society these days...
SPN Lifer and closecover like this.
DJ_Iceman is offline  
Old Mar 6, 2020, 8:26 am
  #152  
Suspended
 
Join Date: Jun 2019
Location: Paris & Scotland (Laird), "Suite on the World"
Programs: Hertz platinum, Bonvoy titanium , Delta flying colonel/platinum/MM, retired old men board member
Posts: 592
In Calif:

1) Apparently you got the name of the dog's owner. The hotel is not obligated to tell you.
2) The hotel is not libel. Same example if in bar and drunk hits you.
3) The owner is libel.
4) If you reached out to pet the dog (how did 'he" get your hand, then you are to blame and courts will find against you. As someone above said, owners have sued and won those bitten who reached out to pet the dog. If you reached out to pet the dog, you provoked him and owner is not liable. cf https://www.alllaw.com/articles/nolo...voked-dog.html
knownothing is offline  
Old Mar 6, 2020, 9:56 am
  #153  
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Programs: Hilton Honors Diamond, IHG Spire, Marriott Titanium, Wyndham Diamond, Caesar's Diamond
Posts: 536
Originally Posted by knownothing
In Calif:

1) Apparently you got the name of the dog's owner. The hotel is not obligated to tell you.
2) The hotel is not libel. Same example if in bar and drunk hits you.
3) The owner is libel.
4) If you reached out to pet the dog (how did 'he" get your hand, then you are to blame and courts will find against you. As someone above said, owners have sued and won those bitten who reached out to pet the dog. If you reached out to pet the dog, you provoked him and owner is not liable. cf https://www.alllaw.com/articles/nolo...voked-dog.html
The article you linked does not say what you are purporting above. I'm no lawyer, but I have my doubts that trying to pet a dog would be considered provocation. Even if it were, the very article you linked to indicates that many other factors are also in play and it isn't nearly as black and white as you state above. Finally, how you can you state absolutely that the hotel is not liable? If a hotel is proven negligent the hotel can be held liable for an injury to a guest. Whether that could be proven in this case, neither of us knows.
closecover likes this.
Voodoo Daddy is offline  
Old Mar 6, 2020, 10:06 am
  #154  
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: HNL
Programs: UA GS4MM, MR LT Plat, Hilton Gold
Posts: 6,447
Originally Posted by deac83
- Talked to my lawyer, who seems to believe the main issue is scaring from the bites, and that we should look at options once the wounds are healed. Also said the if I was a woman the bites on my finger would be a bigger issue for a suit. Certainly sounds like he doesn't see a clear legal path to chase something now.
Lawyers think in terms of damages - and while this incident is very unfortunate, it doesn't translate to a level of high damages (a mauling, dozens of stiches, overnight hospital stays, missed work, infections, etc).

You are certainly entitled to not be out of pocket after what your insurance covers and if the dog owner or Marriott doesn't cover your out of pocket bills - then it is time to file a small claims case - and if it rises to a level of actually going to small claims, you can always ask for pain and suffering (emphasis on ask, versus actually receiving). I suspect a letter to the hotel detailing your out of pocket expenses and a request for goodwill compensation in addition to those expenses will, in my opinion if modest, will get paid by the hotel quickly.
HNLbasedFlyer is offline  
Old Mar 6, 2020, 11:12 am
  #155  
Suspended
 
Join Date: Jun 2019
Location: Paris & Scotland (Laird), "Suite on the World"
Programs: Hertz platinum, Bonvoy titanium , Delta flying colonel/platinum/MM, retired old men board member
Posts: 592
HN: breaking of the skin is probably enough to to imply damages
Voodoo: Provacation depends on which state, dog and history: eg: 1) And in Arizona, provocation happens regardless of the intentions of the plaintiff since provocation depends on whether the action caused the animal to react (rather than on the intent of the actor) Toney v Bouthillier (Ariz App 1981) 631 P2d 557. 2) has the dog ever bit before. 3) Very generally, whether provocation occurred in any given instance depends on whether the action of the plaintiff directed to the dog could have foreseeably could have elicited an aggressive response from the dog. For instance petting a cocker spaniel would not be a foreseeable defense while attempting to pet a pig bull - esp from behind might. As for the hotel, you might find negligence if the dog was off its lease and the hotel had a sign saying they should be and ignored the dog/owner. But otherwise not. Brown v. FMW RRI NC, LLC is an example of the broad reach of the Dog Bite Statute. If a resident’s or guest’s dog is in a “common area” – such as a hotel lobby, elevator, parking lot, or green space – the premises owner can be held liable for that dog’s conduct. That is why it is important for all pet-friendly establishments to require that dog owners leash their dogs. Businesses should enact leashing policies, weight/size restrictions, and ensure that such policies are regularly enforced.
knownothing is offline  
Old Mar 6, 2020, 12:05 pm
  #156  
FlyerTalk Evangelist
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: ZOA, SFO, HKG
Programs: UA 1K 0.9MM, Marriott Gold, HHonors Gold, Hertz PC, SBux Gold, TSA Pre✓
Posts: 13,811
Are you sure you know what you are talking about?

Originally Posted by knownothing
In Calif:
OP has indicated this has nothing to do with California.

Originally Posted by knownothing
1) Apparently you got the name of the dog's owner. The hotel is not obligated to tell you.
True. But in this case, it seems that the dog owner has given false or misleading information. So the hotel will eventually be obligated to tell you, through a subpoena.

Originally Posted by knownothing
2) The hotel is not libel. Same example if in bar and drunk hits you.
Originally Posted by knownothing
3) The owner is libel.
Libel is a form of defamation. Are you sure you mean "libel" instead of "liable"?

Also - your example is not correct, California law or not. A bar owner can be liable because 1) the owner and/or its staffs allow a drunk person entering the premise; and/or 2) the bar serving excessive alcohol to make the person intoxicated.

Originally Posted by knownothing
4) If you reached out to pet the dog (how did 'he" get your hand, then you are to blame and courts will find against you. As someone above said, owners have sued and won those bitten who reached out to pet the dog. If you reached out to pet the dog, you provoked him and owner is not liable. cf https://www.alllaw.com/articles/nolo...voked-dog.html
Partially true. Even the article you cited mentioned the following:"Keep in mind, however, that if the defendant knows his dog is more aggressive than people might expect, he is under a duty to keep people safe from the dog. That means the provocation defense is less likely to be successful if the circumstances were such that the defendant should have warned the plaintiff or otherwise made the situation safe."

It was a pit bull we are talking about. So the provocation defense would not work as much as you believe, as pit bulls are generally more aggressive than others.
garykung is offline  
Old Mar 6, 2020, 3:10 pm
  #157  
Suspended
 
Join Date: Jun 2019
Location: Paris & Scotland (Laird), "Suite on the World"
Programs: Hertz platinum, Bonvoy titanium , Delta flying colonel/platinum/MM, retired old men board member
Posts: 592
seri: liable
I only know CA law as own a hotel there and have been sued and removed from suit as we tell dog owners they must be leased (even ADA allows) and are strict regarding it.
Again apples and oranges. If bar tender keeps serving drunk it is similar to letting non-leased dog
Actually the "provocation defense" works better for pit bulls then say a cocker. They are known to be more aggressive so if a person attempts to pet one - it is their fault.
We have several such suits per year.
Not too hard to fight "name of owner"
knownothing is offline  
Old Mar 6, 2020, 6:24 pm
  #158  
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: 1 hour from Khao Yai, Thailand. No longer Bangkok, China, Taiwan , Palm Coast, FL though still exiled, again, from the Bay Area.
Programs: Only the good ones
Posts: 5,175
Originally Posted by knownothing
I only know CA law as own a hotel there and have been sued... .
We have several such suits per year.
Please, do let us know the name of the hotel so we can avoid it.
rbAA is offline  
Old Mar 6, 2020, 7:16 pm
  #159  
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 46
Originally Posted by rbAA
Please, do let us know the name of the hotel so we can avoid it.
That's a bit harsh. As long as the hotel is strict about dogs being on a leash, it's not really their fault if someone gets bitten.

Originally Posted by knownothing
seri: liable
I only know CA law as own a hotel there and have been sued and removed from suit as we tell dog owners they must be leased (even ADA allows) and are strict regarding it.
Again apples and oranges. If bar tender keeps serving drunk it is similar to letting non-leased dog
Actually the "provocation defense" works better for pit bulls then say a cocker. They are known to be more aggressive so if a person attempts to pet one - it is their fault.
We have several such suits per year.
Not too hard to fight "name of owner"
I'd be curious to hear your perspective as an owner: do you advertise your hotel as pet friendly? Does it make business sense to be "pet friendly," or "pet free," or neither? Is there a large customer base that travels with their pets? Personally I would prefer a pet free hotel, though I probably would not pay a large premium for that.

Aren't there higher costs if you are "pet friendly," like cleaning, wear and tear, lawsuits etc.?
closecover and MSPeconomist like this.
eastbysouthwest is offline  
Old Mar 6, 2020, 8:29 pm
  #160  
Original Poster
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Programs: AA EXP, Marriott Amb Elite & LT Titanium, Hilton Diamond
Posts: 1,230
Originally Posted by knownothing
In Calif:

1) Apparently you got the name of the dog's owner. The hotel is not obligated to tell you.
2) The hotel is not libel. Same example if in bar and drunk hits you.
3) The owner is libel.
4) If you reached out to pet the dog (how did 'he" get your hand, then you are to blame and courts will find against you. As someone above said, owners have sued and won those bitten who reached out to pet the dog. If you reached out to pet the dog, you provoked him and owner is not liable. cf https://www.alllaw.com/articles/nolo...voked-dog.html
Certainly no attempted petting involved. The dog first lunged at my leg, I couldn't tell whether it was a sniffing or nipping, so I was trying to exit the elevator when the dog jump up at me. Owner was looking the other direction and saw none of this.

Hotel's published policy is dogs up to 40 lbs, I believe this dog was at least 50-60 lbs. I'm not a lawyer but if you have a stated policy and then don't enforce them I would think there is liability.

I have the owner's name because the police were called and there is a police report.
SPN Lifer likes this.
deac83 is offline  
Old Mar 6, 2020, 9:01 pm
  #161  
A FlyerTalk Posting Legend
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Minneapolis: DL DM charter 2.3MM
Programs: A3*Gold, SPG Plat, HyattDiamond, MarriottPP, LHW exAccess, ICI, Raffles Amb, NW PE MM, TWA Gold MM
Posts: 100,572
Originally Posted by deac83
Events of today.
- Health department called me back, as promise, this morning (kudos to them) and told me they have not received the rabies certificate from owner. Said the state health department suggested getting with PCP to make decisions about the shots and told me I needed to plan ahead since this is not standard stuff physicians have on hand. While the risk was low, she also pointed out that there are only two known cases of human surviving rabies. Said she would follow up at the end of the day no matter what.
- Made appointment with my PCP for the afternoon.
- Hour later Health Department called me to let me know they just received a fax of a valid rabies certificate for the dog, so I was off the hook on the shots
- Talked to my lawyer, who seems to believe the main issue is scaring from the bites, and that we should look at options once the wounds are healed. Also said the if I was a woman the bites on my finger would be a bigger issue for a suit. Certainly sounds like he doesn't see a clear legal path to chase something now.

Appreciate all the inputs on both sides. Thankfully, this is not turning into unnecessary medical procedures and costs.
I'm horrified that the dog owner took so very long to supply the required documentation of rabies shots. This created a lot of unnecessary anxiety for the OP and IMO (IANAL) would be partial grounds for a lawsuit. I'm also concerned about whether the faxed (rather than original?) documents could be faked.
MSPeconomist is offline  
Old Mar 6, 2020, 11:35 pm
  #162  
FlyerTalk Evangelist
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: ZOA, SFO, HKG
Programs: UA 1K 0.9MM, Marriott Gold, HHonors Gold, Hertz PC, SBux Gold, TSA Pre✓
Posts: 13,811
Originally Posted by knownothing
I only know CA law as own a hotel there and have been sued and removed from suit as we tell dog owners they must be leased (even ADA allows) and are strict regarding it.
I am certainly not involved in those suits. But IIRC, it does not sound like the hotel was removed from the suit. But instead, a judgment (mostly a summary judgment) in favor of the hotel has been entered.

And indeed, if the premise has taken all necessary measures to avoid the incidents, then the hotel will not be liable. However, it does not sound like the case here. At the minimum, when the danger of a pit bull is well known, allowing pit bull to stay in the premise can been seen as a negligent act.

Originally Posted by knownothing
Again apples and oranges. If bar tender keeps serving drunk it is similar to letting non-leased dog
Yes. It also means that whoever control the premise can be liable for something that he/she may or may not do.

Originally Posted by knownothing
Actually the "provocation defense" works better for pit bulls then say a cocker. They are known to be more aggressive so if a person attempts to pet one - it is their fault.
True. But again it will be a question of comparative negligence.
garykung is offline  
Old Mar 7, 2020, 1:14 am
  #163  
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: 1 hour from Khao Yai, Thailand. No longer Bangkok, China, Taiwan , Palm Coast, FL though still exiled, again, from the Bay Area.
Programs: Only the good ones
Posts: 5,175
Originally Posted by eastbysouthwest
That's a bit harsh. As long as the hotel is strict about dogs being on a leash, it's not really their fault if someone gets bitten.
Not really. I'm not into pet-friendly hotels given the risk of disease and bites, both dog and fleas. By the way, ever see two dog owners with dogs on leashes trying to counter the aggression of the confrontation. Maybe if the owners the size and strength of a bodybuilder, they could handle their (large) animal, but too often it results in an uncontrolled animal or two. No thanks. And, the OP faced a dog on a leash and look what happened.
closecover likes this.
rbAA is offline  
Old Mar 7, 2020, 6:49 am
  #164  
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Programs: AA EXP, UA Silver (Thanks Marriott!), Marriott Lifetime Titanium & Hyatt Globalist
Posts: 648
Originally Posted by MSPeconomist
I'm also concerned about whether the faxed (rather than original?) documents could be faked.
You cant fake a rabies certification of vaccination. There is a unique ID on the form that ties the physical injection back to the pet and owner. This is also supposed to be registered with the state where the vaccine was actually administered.

Not sure why one state DoH did not contact the dog owners state to obtain vaccine verification?
SPN Lifer likes this.
Chewie is offline  
Old Mar 7, 2020, 7:00 am
  #165  
Suspended
 
Join Date: Jun 2019
Location: Paris & Scotland (Laird), "Suite on the World"
Programs: Hertz platinum, Bonvoy titanium , Delta flying colonel/platinum/MM, retired old men board member
Posts: 592
Originally Posted by eastbysouthwest
That's a bit harsh. As long as the hotel is strict about dogs being on a leash, it's not really their fault if someone gets bitten.



I'd be curious to hear your perspective as an owner: do you advertise your hotel as pet friendly? Does it make business sense to be "pet friendly," or "pet free," or neither? Is there a large customer base that travels with their pets? Personally I would prefer a pet free hotel, though I probably would not pay a large premium for that.

Aren't there higher costs if you are "pet friendly," like cleaning, wear and tear, lawsuits etc.?
About 25% of guests have pets. Yes we charge a cleaning fee. We are strict about barking, leash and weight. From what OP posted, the hotel may have some liability (size of dog)
knownothing is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Manage Preferences Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service -

This site is owned, operated, and maintained by MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Designated trademarks are the property of their respective owners.