I am disappointed in the Maryland Courts

Discuss Breed Specific Legislation and local county laws on pit bull ownership.
User avatar
Nickdawg
Addicted to PBF
Posts: 7050
Joined: Thu Feb 09, 2006 7:15 pm

Re: I am disappointed in the Maryland Courts

Postby Nickdawg » Thu May 24, 2012 5:10 pm

that should read didn't read this yet but certainly provides the bkgd of case from "the pass this crazy law" side...

User avatar
aznchipmunk
Bully Lover 4 Life
Posts: 1252
Joined: Wed Oct 19, 2005 2:43 pm
Location: My own little world, people know me here
Contact:

Re: I am disappointed in the Maryland Courts

Postby aznchipmunk » Fri May 25, 2012 7:32 am

Got this e-mail from Jamine's House; another 'peacful rally' - I'll be there

Hi All!

Please join me on June 16 @ 11am to make a difference! (Please forgive the mass email)

Here is the event link for the next Positive Pit Bull Awareness Day in Annapolis. I will be doing these regularly and would appreciate your help by promoting. https://www.facebook.com/#!/events/386187101417223/

Also on July 8, I will be asking everyone with an ambassador dog to hit their local city streets to show off their well behaved dog (This event will NOT be breed specific). More details to come.

Please help promote, share on FB, tell others, etc. If anyone has the means to design a flyer, please let me know.

Thanks!

Jess

--
Details for June 16:

On June 16 @ 11am you are invited to join us for a POSITIVE PIT BULL AWARENESS DAY in downtown Annapolis.

The purpose of this event is to promote responsible dog ownership.

Our goal is to change societies perception of the misunderstood and media targeted breeds through a positive example.

Our Mission is to over turn the “Pit Bull” court ruling by peacefully and respectfully standing up for our family members.

While these events are specific for pit bull type dogs, we invite ALL ambassadors of their breed out. Rulings as such lead to BSL (Breed Specific Legislation). BSL is a dangerous ban that can effect ANY breed. As of today there are 75 breeds considered as “dangerous” breeds... your dog, your breed could be next.

In order to fight BSL it is up to us dog owners to train, raise, love and respect our dogs so that we create an ambassador of the breed and show law makers that with responsible dog ownership, there are no bad dogs- just bad owners.

On June 16 we invite those of you who have ambassadors of a breed to enjoy the day in downtown Annapolis. There will be no rally, no march, no protest. Just simply a bunch of dog owners enjoying the day with their well behaved dog. A silent flash mob of sorts... minus the song and dance :)

We will spread out through the town to eat, drink, shop and be merry. Represent yourself and your dog well. The idea is; if there is one or two “dog haters” in town we hope to lead by example so that after they leave the city of Annapolis they can look back and think; “Huh... I saw 20 pit bull type dogs. None looked the same, some I did not realize were pits and yet each of them were CALM, WELL BEHAVED, SWEET dogs hanging with their families”

We want the “haters” to walk away with an open mind. We may not be able to open all of their minds but if we have changed one persons mind to recognize the softer, loving, family orientated side of this amazingly loyal breed then we have accomplished our goal. :)

We ask you to please put on your best behavior, bring only your dog that does well in busy crowds, is okay with random strangers approaching, is okay being approached by children and other dogs, etc.

Please remember that life is about perception. If we want to change the misperception we must represent ourselves calm, cool and collectively. Stay respectful, speak factual and be truthful.

Hope to see in Annapolis on June 16!

Thank you for your support,

Jess

User avatar
BabyReba
Moderator
Posts: 11589
Joined: Fri Nov 14, 2003 7:21 pm
Location: Winter Park, Florida
Contact:

Re: I am disappointed in the Maryland Courts

Postby BabyReba » Thu May 31, 2012 11:35 am

The attorneys for the landlord DID file a motion for reconsideration!

http://www.baltimoresun.com/news/opinion/oped/bs-ed-rodricks-dogs-20120530,0,3542452.column

And the state legislature has formed a task force to review the ruling and make legislative recommendations!

http://www.wboc.com/story/18660466/maryland-lawmakers-form-pit-bull-task-force

User avatar
snikles
Adolescent Bully
Posts: 307
Joined: Sun Mar 13, 2011 8:51 am
Location: Annapolis, MD

Re: I am disappointed in the Maryland Courts

Postby snikles » Fri Jun 01, 2012 8:10 pm

BabyReba wrote:The attorneys for the landlord DID file a motion for reconsideration!

http://www.baltimoresun.com/news/opinion/oped/bs-ed-rodricks-dogs-20120530,0,3542452.column

And the state legislature has formed a task force to review the ruling and make legislative recommendations!

http://www.wboc.com/story/18660466/maryland-lawmakers-form-pit-bull-task-force


The attorneys for the landlords could care less about the plight of pit bulls or pit bull owners. There main concern is the idea that Court of Appeals can change the common law with an opinion as opposed to needing the legislature to pass a law. They find that part of the ruling particularly troubling as the Court of Appeals could potentially rule to overturn contributory negligence and instituted some type of comparative negligence system in Maryland.

I do believe that the legislature will eventually resolve this issue and come up with some sensible dangerous dog law that is not based on breed. There is a bipartisan effort and that is always a positive thing.

User avatar
Amie
Moderator
Posts: 17463
Joined: Wed Oct 24, 2007 7:10 pm
Contact:

Re: I am disappointed in the Maryland Courts

Postby Amie » Mon Jun 04, 2012 11:41 am

snikles wrote:The attorneys for the landlords could care less about the plight of pit bulls or pit bull owners. There main concern is the idea that Court of Appeals can change the common law with an opinion as opposed to needing the legislature to pass a law. They find that part of the ruling particularly troubling as the Court of Appeals could potentially rule to overturn contributory negligence and instituted some type of comparative negligence system in Maryland.


Well... yeah. But so what? It is troubling that they were able to do this much damage in such a round-about way.

I don't need anyone else to fight for my dogs on a personal level, I need them to fight for the right thing. It's the only way we're going to win.

User avatar
heather
Addicted to PBF
Posts: 8830
Joined: Sun Mar 28, 2004 10:55 pm
Location: Geneva, NY

Re: I am disappointed in the Maryland Courts

Postby heather » Mon Jun 04, 2012 7:35 pm

http://blessthebullys.wordpress.com/201 ... cuss-6512/


As a direct result of the Maryland Court of Appeals ruling that “pit bull type dogs are inherently dangerous," the city of Hagerstown, Maryland is considering an ordinance that would regulate the ownership of pit bulls in the city limits. “Pit Bull” is defined as "Staffordshire Bull Terrier, American Pit Bull Terrier, American Bulldog, Bull Terrier, and all dogs which have the appearance of being predominantly of the breed of dogs" known as the above. The ordinance is attached.


The council will be holding a work session tomorrow, June 5, 2012, at 4:00 p.m., and I have confirmed with the city clerk that this issue will be discussed. Meetings are held at Council Chambers, Second Floor of City Hall, which is located at One East Franklin Street, Hagerstown, Maryland. The public can attend the work sessions, but the council will not hear any public comments.


The city clerk advised, however, that the public is welcome to address the council at the hearing on June 19, 2012 at 7:00 p.m., when a vote may be taken on the ordinance.


Please send your polite, respectful and informative opposition to breed specific legislation to the Hagerstown city officials. Please also include viable suggestions and alternatives for their consideration.


City of Hagerstown
One E. Franklin St.
Second Floor, City Hall
Hagerstown, MD 21740
Phone: (301) 766-4175


Robert E. Bruchey:
mayor@hagerstownmd.org


Entire City Council:
citycouncilmail@hagerstownmd.org


Individual Council Members:
wbreichner@hagerstownmd.org
mbrubaker@hagerstownmd.org
feaston@hagerstownmd.org
ahaywood@hagerstownmd.org
lmetzner@hagerstownmd.org


City Clerk
Denise Spickler
Ph: (301) 766-4183
Fx: (301) 790-3424
dspickler@hagerstownmd.org

User avatar
snikles
Adolescent Bully
Posts: 307
Joined: Sun Mar 13, 2011 8:51 am
Location: Annapolis, MD

Re: I am disappointed in the Maryland Courts

Postby snikles » Wed Jun 06, 2012 10:17 am

Task force formed to study pit bull legislation

Maryland's legislative leaders today appointed a bipartisan panel to study the impact of recent court ruling that labeled pit bulls as 'inherently dangerous' for liability purposes and to make recommendations about possible legislative fixes.

Five members from each chamber have been named, including three of the five delegates who introduced legislation aimed at overturning the court's ruling during the May special session in Annapolis.


http://articles.baltimoresun.com/2012-0 ... d-specific

User avatar
heather
Addicted to PBF
Posts: 8830
Joined: Sun Mar 28, 2004 10:55 pm
Location: Geneva, NY

Re: I am disappointed in the Maryland Courts

Postby heather » Wed Jun 20, 2012 7:44 am

Pit Bull Task Force Meeting Today

Tuesday, June 19, 2012
Robert Lang
A legislative task force studying pit bulls holds its first meeting today in Annapolis.

The task force of ten lawmakers was formed after an April decision by the Maryland Court of Appeals which ruled pit bulls were an "inherently dangerous" breed, and the dog's owners and their landlords would automatically be responsible for any damage or injuries the dogs may cause.

Animal rights advocates fear a number of dogs will be abandoned and euthanized as a result of the decision.

They want lawmakers to pass a bill that would ban the state from classifying any breed of dog as "inherently dangerous."

The task force will hear from 25 witnesses, including dog owners, attorneys, animal advocates, insurers and landlords.

The task force has already scheduled another meeting for next Tuesday to come up with recommendations.

A number of lawmakers, and animal rights advocates want the Maryland General Assembly to consider this issue if there is a special session next month to deal with expanded gambling.

Senators on the task force include Democrats Brian Frosh, Lisa Gladden, Jamie Raskin and Norman Stone, as well as Republican Joe Getty.

Delegates on the task force include Democrats Curt Anderson, Eric Bromwell, Ben Kramer, and Heather Mizeur, as well as Republican Michael Smigel.

http://www.wbal.com/article/91148/2/tem ... ting-Today

User avatar
heather
Addicted to PBF
Posts: 8830
Joined: Sun Mar 28, 2004 10:55 pm
Location: Geneva, NY

Re: I am disappointed in the Maryland Courts

Postby heather » Wed Jun 20, 2012 7:45 am

anyone know yet how it went?

The task force hearing is tomorrow, Tuesday, June 19 at 10:00 a.m. You can listen to the hearing at this link:
http://mlis.state.md.us/2012rs/hearsch/0614_pbt.htm





Annapolis task force to meet over pit bull liability law

A recent court ruling in Maryland named pit bulls as dangerous dogs, making landlords and "other people" liable for any injury by a pit bull on their property.
Now, animal lovers, land owners and those who advocate pit bull bans plan to converge on Annapolis for a special task force hearing on the issue.

"You are talking about veterinarians and boarding kennels and pet sitters and trainers and human societies and the list goes on and on and on. Landlords and tenants also," said Paul Miller with the Washington County Animal Shelter of the April appellate court ruling.

An attorney for Maryland landlords filed a brief with the Court of Appeals pointing out that some could be forced to evict dog owners, adding, "...no reasonable residential or commercial landlord, homeowner's association, condominium association or insurer could have anticipated that this court would impose strict liability for the mere presence of a dog on a rental premises."

Another question the legislative task force will face is how do you tell if a dog is really part pit bull?

Miller said, "It's a guess when dogs come here. We don't know what we are looking at. Sometimes it takes more than one person and sometimes we are right and sometimes we are wrong."

At least one group supports the ruling. Dogbite.org filed a brief advocating stricter anti-pit bull laws, arguing that the breed is not only dangerous, but that numerous television programs have made pit bulls easily identifiable.

The task force meets for the first time at 10 a.m. Tuesday in Annapolis.

http://www.wjla.com/articles/2012/06/an ... 77075.html

User avatar
heather
Addicted to PBF
Posts: 8830
Joined: Sun Mar 28, 2004 10:55 pm
Location: Geneva, NY

Re: I am disappointed in the Maryland Courts

Postby heather » Wed Jun 20, 2012 7:47 am

First bite could cost owners of all dogs in Maryland

Ruling on pit bulls prompted change


ANNAPOLIS — Maryland lawmakers could make all dog owners liable for their dog’s first bite in response to an April court ruling that classified only pit bulls as “inherently dangerous.”

A 10-member task force of Senate and House members heard testimony Tuesday in response to the Court of Appeals ruling. It excludes pit bulls and pit bull mixes from the state’s so-called “one-bite law,” which only holds dog owners responsible for a bite or attack if the dog previously had bitten or threatened another person.

Many animal-rights advocates call the ruling unfair discrimination against the dogs and their owners, and the task force could recommend legislation next week that would effectively cancel out the decision.

One option they discussed Tuesday was to getrid of the one-bite law and hold all owners liable from the first violent incident — a move that many lawmakers and activists said would put pit bulls back on equal footing with other breeds and force all dog owners to be more responsible.

“I do get a feeling that a consensus is building around an approach that would be assuring strict liability,” said Delegate Heather R. Mizeur, Montgomery Democrat and task force member. “We’re trying to strike the right balance here between trying to protect [attack victims] and wanting to remedy the problem that was created by the court ruling.”

Many other states already hold owners of all breeds liable from the first bite, and the proposal appeared to draw near-unanimous approval Tuesday from supporters and opponents of the Court of Appeals ruling.

The court rendered its opinion in response to a case in which Dominic Solesky, then 10 years old, was attacked in 2007 and severely injured by a pit bull that escaped from its owners’ pen.

Dominic’s parents — Anthony and Irene Solesky — testified that they think many activists are focusing too closely on the welfare of dogs and ignoring the welfare of victims.

“I don’t want to see anybody lose their dog, but I almost lost my son that day,” said Mrs. Solesky. “That’s something that needs to be recognized loud and clear.”

The much thornier issue at Tuesday’s hearing was whether lawmakers should combat a portion of the court ruling that extends liability to landlords who knowingly rent to pit bull owners.

Many activists worry that the decision will force many owners to give their dogs away or face eviction.

Critics at the hearing argued that the ruling would be highly difficult to enforce, as even experts often have difficulty identifying the lineage of mix-breed dogs.

“The opinion gives us no guidance about what a pit bull is or what a pit bull mix is, or how much of a mix is going to trigger this ‘inherently dangerous’ tag,” said Heidi Meinzer, secretary of the Maryland State Bar Association Animal Law Section.

Not everyone in attendance opposed the Court of Appeals opinion.

Teresa Lynn Chagrin, animal care and control specialist for People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (PETA), praised the court and said the ruling will discourage potentially neglectful or abusive owners from adopting the dogs.

The task force will meet again June 26 and likely will finalize a bill if lawmakers still expect to meet in July for a special session primarily aimed at considering expanded gambling in the state.

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/201 ... in-maryla/

User avatar
snikles
Adolescent Bully
Posts: 307
Joined: Sun Mar 13, 2011 8:51 am
Location: Annapolis, MD

Re: I am disappointed in the Maryland Courts

Postby snikles » Thu Jun 21, 2012 10:06 am

Delegate Jon Cardin briefly discusses the pit bull issue at the beginning of this segment.

http://www.comcastnewsmakers.com/video/ ... -update-2/

User avatar
Amie
Moderator
Posts: 17463
Joined: Wed Oct 24, 2007 7:10 pm
Contact:

Re: I am disappointed in the Maryland Courts

Postby Amie » Mon Jun 25, 2012 8:30 pm

We talked to this guy for almost two hours and this is what he took away, but I suppose it's still at least fair:
http://baltimore.cbslocal.com/2012/06/2 ... ed-ruling/

User avatar
snikles
Adolescent Bully
Posts: 307
Joined: Sun Mar 13, 2011 8:51 am
Location: Annapolis, MD

Re: I am disappointed in the Maryland Courts

Postby snikles » Wed Jun 27, 2012 9:46 pm

Looks like they are going for strict liability for all dogs regardless of breed.

http://www.capitalgazette.com/news/gove ... 0bedc.html

User avatar
heather
Addicted to PBF
Posts: 8830
Joined: Sun Mar 28, 2004 10:55 pm
Location: Geneva, NY

Re: I am disappointed in the Maryland Courts

Postby heather » Fri Jun 29, 2012 6:58 am

No Special Session Means No Action On Pit Bulls; Task Force To Continue To Meet

Tuesday, June 26, 2012
Robert Lang
Members of a legislative task force studying legislation on pit bulls were supposed to meet for the last time today.

Instead, the panel's chairman tells WBAL News that the panel will likely continue to meet trough the summer.

Baltimore City Delegate Curt Anderson says the lack of an agreement on gambling legislation means a special session of the legislature next month is not likely to happen, and that means action on a pit bull legislation will likely be delayed, possibly until January.

Legislative leaders and some animal rights activists wanted lawmakers to consider a bill on pit bulls in the special session.

The task force was formed after a decision by the Maryland Court of Appeals in April, that ruled that pit bulls were an "inherently dangerous breed" of dogs, and their owners and their landlords would be automatically responsible for any damages or injury the dogs may cause.

Pit bull owners, and animal rights activists feared that would lead dog owners to give up their animals.

Anderson says the panel agrees on language in the bill that would ban the state from declaring any breed of dog to be "inherently dangerous." He says there would also be a "strict liability" provision in the bill that would hold dog owners responsible for injuries or damages caused by any breed of dogs.

Anderson says without a special session, the task force is also likely to consider broader legislation to address concerns of landlords, and public safety officials.

During a hearing last week, the family of Dominic Solesky, who survived a pit bull attack in 2007, told lawmakers that public safety should be the main priority of the legislation, not the rights of dog owners.

Anderson told WBAL News that during today's meeting the task force will likely work out a schedule for further meetings, as well as determine when the panel wants to make recommendations to legislative leaders.

Senators on the task force include Democrats Brian Frosh, Lisa Gladden, Jamie Raskin and Norman Stone, as well as Republican Joe Getty.

Besides Anderson, delegates on the task force include Democrats Eric Bromwell, Ben Kramer, and Heather Mizeur, as well as Republican Michael Smigel.

http://www.wbal.com/article/91397/3/tem ... ue-To-Meet

User avatar
Amie
Moderator
Posts: 17463
Joined: Wed Oct 24, 2007 7:10 pm
Contact:

Re: I am disappointed in the Maryland Courts

Postby Amie » Wed Jul 11, 2012 10:02 am

Maryland Attorney General Confirms that Tracey v. Solesky Decision Regarding Dogs Is Not Yet in Effect

(July 11, 2012)—The Maryland Office of the Attorney General issued an opinion stating that the controversial Maryland Court of Appeals decision holding that all pit bull and pit bull type dogs are “inherently dangerous” is not yet in effect. The Court of Appeals decision in Tracey v. Solesky, issued two months ago, holds that not just owners of pit bull-type dogs but anyone with the power to control the presence of these dogs is strictly liable for any damages they cause. The Office of the Attorney General issued its statement in response to a request submitted earlier this week by Maryland Delegate Heather Mizeur, D-Montgomery.

Reports have increased in recent weeks from Maryland residents being forced to choose between their family pets and their homes, as landlords have worried about liability imposed by Tracey. The imposition of strict liability on parties other than the dog owner is unprecedented, as is the Court’s singling out of one particular type of dogs for this stricter standard.

“With this latest news, we urge landlords and property owners across the state to adhere to their existing leases with dog owning tenants,” said Tami Santelli, Maryland senior state director for The HSUS. “With the ruling suspended for the time being, landlords have no legal basis to evict their tenants who may own ‘pit bull type dogs’. This is fantastic news.”

The Attorney General’s opinion hinges on a Maryland Rule of Procedure (8-605) which provides that any mandate from the Court of Appeals will be stayed pending the Court’s decision on a motion for reconsideration. On May 26, State Farm Insurance Company, a party in the Tracey case, filed a motion asking the Court of Appeals to reconsider its decision in Tracey. Because the Court has not yet ruled on that motion for reconsideration, the ruling in Tracey is stayed.

“After the initial court ruling, confusion reigned. Landlords, fearing new liability concerns, began readying eviction notices to their renters with pit bulls,” said Del. Mizeur. “This opinion is welcomed relief for thousands of Maryland families that should never have to choose between their beloved family pet and their home. It gives us time to pass a legislative remedy to permanently fix this problem,” she concluded.

The Maryland General Assembly may consider this issue this summer if Gov. Martin O’Malley calls a special session. The joint legislative task force appointed to study this issue held a work session on June 26 to discuss the details of potential legislation. If there is no special session, a legislative fix will have to wait until January, making this potential reprieve even more critical.


Return to “Laws”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests