Michelle Carr v. Robert Stice
Published: Mar. 24, 2023 | Result Date: Nov. 7, 2022 | Filing Date: Oct. 4, 2021 |Case number: 30-2021-01224296-CU-PO-CJC Settlement – $650,000
Judge
Court
Orange County Superior Court
Attorneys
Plaintiff
Sterling S. Winchell
(Law Offices of Sterling S. Winchell)
Defendant
Marcus S. Loo
( Stratman & Williams-Abrego)
Facts
Plaintiff Michelle Carr owns and operates a dog and cat grooming salon, handles all operations of the business in the front reception-room, lobby area, namely greeting and interacting with all customers when they bring in their pets, checking their pets in for grooming services. Defendant brought his Wheaton Terrier in for grooming. Defendant Robert Stice was a frequent customer. Defendant didn't sign his dog in that day, and instead informed Plaintiff that his dog had undergone recent surgery and asked whether it was safe or advisable to admit the dog for bath and grooming. Plaintiff asked where the surgery incisions were, and Defendant responded on back of one thy and another on the inner side of the back leg and asked Plaintiff to look them. When Plaintiff bent over to look at the incisions, the dog lunged at Plaintiff and bit her violently on the left ear, completely tearing off the eaves flap [the upper part of the ear]. Plaintiff then ran to the paper towel dispenser to get something to stop the bleeding. When she turned around, Defendant handed Michelle the top half of her left ear that was on the floor, and which otherwise could have been lost or eaten up by the dog. Plaintiff had her employees close the store, and Plaintiff immediately dashed out the door with her ear in a paper towel and sped in her car to Fountain Valley Regional Hospital emergency. Plaintiff underwent reconstructive surgery that same morning.
Contentions
PLAINTIFF'S CONTENTIONS: Plaintiff claimed strict liability for a dog bite. Plaintiff contends the veterinarian rule, namely that someone who routinely works with dogs assumes the risk of dog bites, did not apply because it is inapplicable where commercial dog groomer had not yet formally accepted defendant's dog for grooming or entered into contractual grooming agreement.
DEFENDANT'S CONTENTIONS: Defense asserted the veternarian defense rule.
Insurer
Farmers
Specials in Evidence
Meds: $273,713
Injuries
Disfigurement due to loss of upper half of left ear, four reconstructive surguries over a period of one year, and continual pain and inconvenience during the one year recovery.
Result
The case settled for $650,000.
For reprint rights or to order a copy of your photo:
Email
jeremy@reprintpros.com
for prices.
Direct dial: 949-702-5390