Dog Bite Sample Pleading

IN THE CIRCUIT COURT FOR PRINCE GEORGE’S COUNTY, MARYLAND

JANE DOE, individually and *
as mother, guardian and next friend of
Son Doe, a minor *
5555 Main Street
Greenbelt, MD 20770 *
Case No.:
Plaintiff *
v. *
JOHN SMITH *
1212 Main Street
Upper Marlboro, MD 20772 *
Defendant *

COMPLAINT

COMES NOW, the Plaintiff, Jane Doe, individually and as mother, guardian and next friend of Son Doe, a minor, by and through her attorneys, FORAN & FORAN, P.A., and sues the Defendant, John Smith, and for reasons therefore states as follows:

1. That the Plaintiff, Jane Doe, is an adult resident of Prince George’s County, Maryland and is the mother, guardian, and next friend of Son Doe, a minor.
2. That the Plaintiff, Son Doe, is a minor resident of Prince George’s County, Maryland.
3. That the Defendant, John Smith, is an adult resident of Prince George’s County, Maryland.
4. That on or about January 2, 2008, the minor, Son Doe, was playing on the playground of the apartment development where he lives, when a rotweiler owned by the Defendant, John Smith, attacked the minor, Son Doe, and tore into his left leg, inflicting severe damage to his leg.
5. That the aforesaid rotweiler acted in a vicious manner, and the Defendant, John Smith, knew or should have known of the vicious propensities of the rotweiler.
6. That pursuant to Prince George’s County’s leash law, the owner of a dog must keep its dog on a leash at all times when the dog is out in a public place.
7. That on the day in question, just prior to the attack, the Defendant, John Smith, did not have his dog on a leash. This was in clear violation of Prince George’s County’s leash law.
8. That the Defendant, John Smith, owed a duty to the minor, Son Doe, to properly restrain and/or confine the rotweiler. The Defendant, John Smith, had knowledge, actual and/or constructive, of the vicious propensity of the dog and failed to remedy same, thereby causing the ensuing incident.
9. That the Defendant, John Smith, breached the duty owed to the minor, Son Doe, by failing to properly restrain and/or confine the rotweiler and not permit the dog to run loose.
10. That as a direct and proximate result of the negligence of the Defendant, John Smith, the minor, Son Doe, was severely injured.
11. That, according to a report by the Prince George’s County Department of Animal Control, the dog was in no way provoked by the minor, Son Doe.
12. At all times in question, the minor, Son Doe, acted in a careful and prudent manner without any negligence contributing whatsoever by the minor, Son Doe.
COUNT I
(Negligence)
13. The Plaintiff, Jane Doe, individually and as mother, guardian and next friend of Son Doe, a minor, adopts and incorporates all of the facts and allegations set forth above as if fully set forth herein.
14. That the Defendant, John Smith, owed a duty to the minor, Son Doe, to properly restrain and confine his rotweiler. The Defendant, John Smith, had knowledge, actual and/or constructive, of the vicious propensity of the dog and failed to remedy same, thereby causing the ensuing incident.
15. That the Defendant, John Smith, negligently breached his duty owed to the minor, Son Doe, by failing to properly restrain and confine the rotweiler and permitting the dog to run loose contrary to the laws of the State of Maryland and Prince George’s County.
16. That as a direct and proximate result of the aforesaid incident, which was caused by the negligence of the Defendant, John Smith, the minor, Son Doe, who was at all times exercising due care, suffered severe pain and permanent injuries to his body, as well as severe and protracted shock to his nervous system, all of which have caused and will continue to cause him great pain and mental anguish.
17. That as a further direct and proximate result of the negligence of the Defendant, John Smith, the Plaintiff, Jane Doe, has been forced to expend and will continue to expend large sums of money for hospitalization, x-rays, nurses, medical treatment and medicine for the treatment of the aforesaid injuries to the minor, Son Doe.
    WHEREFORE, the Plaintiff, Jane Doe, individually and as mother, guardian and next friend of Son Doe, a minor, demands judgment against the Defendant, John Smith, in the amount of Three Hundred Thousand Dollars ($300,000.00) for damages, together with the costs of this action and such other relief as is deemed just and proper.
COUNT II
(Strict Liability)
18. That the Plaintiff, Jane Doe, individually and as mother, guardian and next friend of Son Doe, a minor, adopts and incorporates all of the facts and allegations set forth above as if fully set forth herein.
19. That the Defendant, John Smith, as having dominion and control of the
20. rotweiler dog that is responsible for the aforesaid incident, owed a duty to the minor, Son Doe, to
21. keep him safe from dangerous conditions by properly constraining and/or confining the dangerous and vicious dog, and not permitting the dog to run loose on the grounds of the apartment development where he lives. The Defendant, John Smith, exposed the minor, Son Doe, to a dangerous animal which the Defendant, John Smith, knew or should have known had dangerous propensities.
22. That as a direct and proximate result of the aforesaid incident which was caused by the negligence of the Defendant, John Smith, the minor, Son Doe, who was at all times exercising due care, suffered severe pain and permanent injuries to his body as well as severe and protracted shock to his nervous system, all which have caused and will continue to cause him great pain and anguish.
23. That as further direct and proximate result of the negligence of the Defendant, John Smith, the Plaintiff, Jane Doe, has been forced to expend and will continue to expend large sums of money for hospitalization, x-rays, nurses, medical treatment, and medicine for the treatment of the aforesaid injuries to the minor, Son Doe.
    WHEREFORE, the Plaintiff, Jane Doe, individually and mother, guardian and next friend of Son Doe, a minor, demands judgment against the Defendant, John Smith, in the amount of Three Hundred Thousand Dollars ($300,000.00) for damages, together with the costs of this action and such other relief as is deemed just and proper.

Respectfully Submitted,
FORAN & FORAN, P.A.

BY:_____________________________

Ryan J. Foran
Attorneys for Plaintiff
6301 Ivy Lane, #600
Greenbelt, Maryland 20770
(301) 441-2022

---