writerguyfl

By going after the hotel instead of the person responsible, you're raising the room rates for everyone. After all, the lawyers fees/damages/increased insurance rates the hotel will pay out will simply get passed along to the future guests.

You're jumping to an unproven conclusion. Why assume that the dog owner can't pay? You seem to letting the "clearly responsible" party completely off the hook because of the potential for negative consequences.

cmd320

Haha, no I don’t carry.

arlflyer

This thread really has little to do with Marriott and should not be litigated on the Internet. The OP has already written more than they should in a public forum, possibly making things harder on themselves.

corporate-wage-slave

I have had dogs all my life and have trained many dozen in my shepherd persona. There are 8 dogs at my feet at the moment.

I think I can see what happened here. The dog is an agricultural livestock driving specialist, and probably not used to being in a confined box. If the owner had their back to the situation the dog's reaction would be defend the limited territory and the owner in the way that it did. The owner could, should have reasonably worked out this risk of this in advance and should have had the dog under very strict control, as well as greeting the OP as a long lost friend so the dog knew that all was well. This is 100% the owner's fault, the dog did what was reasonably natural to do, though I fear that if the OP over reacts it will be the dog that will suffer. 40lbs is about right for this sort of dog, they aren't that heavy, but it's kind of irrelevant, my nastiest dog bite was from a 5 pound Yorkshire Terrier when I put a leaflet through a letter box. I don't think that Yorkie will be voting for my preferred political party.

I suppose I should go along with the "get the bite checked by a doctor" stuff, but in a domestic USA situation the risk is low (I personally wouldn't bother, if it was a random street dog that would be another matter). And I guess the bite was a nuisance and a shock. Then what? Well I'm not into this litigation mindset, truly what good does do to anyone? It just becomes hassle for all but the lawyers. You can perhaps tell I'm not an American. But I am in the mindset that says the owner really should face their responsibilities here, what if it was a child that got attacked? It's the sort of thing where scars and scares can be lifelong. On the other hand the owner made a brief but stupid mistake, you really want them to next time take a whole lot more attention and probably not use an elevator, but I am sure the owner is regretting their inattention, or I would hope so. Personally I'd reach out to the owner by email or letter and say "look, I really don't want to take this any further, but can you give some reassurance about this? If you can put my mind at ease then that would be great". Maybe the police officer can help with that if you were not given the owner's details.

nachosdelux

anyone that watches "Judge Judy" with any regularity recognizes that there are lots of irresponsible dog owners who refuse to accept any responsibility when their precious "baby" injures another pet or person.

I say this as a dog lover, responsible dog "parent", and volunteer at a local dog rescue.

m.photog

Go after the hotel and the owner of the dog. If it attacked once it will attack again and should be destroyed.
I am sick of people who can’t leave their stinky animals at home. I am also sick of hotels and other businesses that pander to them. They are animals not people, where did this come from?

HaleiwaFlyer

One of the many reason litigation occurs is due to a communication breakdown, where the wronged party feels they had an inadequate response. Based on the OPs original post, the situation could have been handled better by both the hotel and dog's owner. Based on the OPs description, the owner of the dog had no remorse and yelled at the OP in the elevator, and the hotel did little to help. The owner of the dog and the hotel had their chance to communicate properly, and didn't. Why should the OP reach out to the dog's owner and waste his valuable time? Why shouldn't the dog owner at this point do everything they can to put the OP's mind at peace instead?

Coming from the medical field, lots of research goes into medical malpractice lawsuits, and lack of communication is a huge part of litigation. Even when communication is appropriate, lawsuits cannot be prevented, or may be necessary to recoup loses.

Only the OP can answer the rationale for the lawsuit, if any. We can all put our opinions on what we would do in the same situation, but there is no right nor wrong answer for litigation, it is a personal choice.

mrcool1122

Everyone trying to intuit their way through how tort liability works. Even ostensibly simple dog bite cases can have vastly different legal outcomes based on small fact variations. Common sense does not dictate the result; the law does. No advice here is useful other than to speak to a lawyer.

The_Bouncer

This "take your dog everywhere" business has gone way too far. The owner was irresponsible in not keeping his dog under control and the hotel was irresponsible in allowing it to be in a public area. I hope the OP takes both of them to the cleaners.

1P

IMO, anyone who owns a pit bull should be put down along with the dog!

FT

Another bad take.

Admiral Ackbar

Aah the good old FT pretentiousness which increases exponentially with account age. Anyone who makes crass generalisations about a topic they know nothing about should be put down as well, would make the world a better place. Muppet.

DJ_Iceman

Thanks for sharing the details, OP. Presumably there are security cams in the elevators that will corroborate your story, and I hope the police already got copies of those before they get erased/overwritten. If this had happened to me exactly as you wrote it, even though I've never sued anyone in my life, I would probably go after the dog's owner. While the hotel's lack of caring is unfortunate (and shows they are probably placing avoidance of legal liability ahead of hospitality, which is a shame but perhaps understandable given the kinds of attitudes in society as shown by some of the posts here), the owner's attitude ticks me off. Had he apologized profusely, shown recognition of the seriousness of the situation, offered to pay any medical bills, etc. then I would likely have brushed it off as "hey, not that big a deal overall, but try to keep tighter hold of your dog in the future". Unfortunately, he sounds oblivious and selfish, two traits that REALLY annoy me in society these days.

porciuscato

Owning a pit bull is like walking around with a loaded gun. If something happens it’s your fault. Period. The breed was created to be vicious. It’s not about race, btw. It’s about stupid, which comes in all colors and creeds.

if you doubt, do a quick google on pit bulls and infant maulings. Right, I know, it was actually the 2 year old’s fault.....

RedSun

This is an accident. Think what happens when you have a traffic accident.

1. The dog owner is responsible for the damage and injury of the victim. No less and no more. Probably all medical bills. Not sure about lose wages. Lawyer can figure out just like car insurance company. Dog owner should have some liability insurance.
2. It is up to the police and animal doctor to decide on the fate of the dog. We can't insist that dog be destroyed because the dog hurt one person. With the culture in America, the dog would probably get a lot of chances before anything is done to him.
3. In additional to the liability from the dog owner, certainly the hotel is responsible too. The coverage may be broader than the medical bills the dog owner should be responsible. The lawyer can figure it out, like the loss of enjoyment and all the fun stuff.