Pingaro v. Rossi

731 A.2d 523 (1999)

Purchase the Printed Copy at bsmsphd.com

Nature of the Case

To access this section all you need to do is click here and register.

Facts

P sued D for dog bites. While performing her meter reading duties, P arrived at D's house. Her data cap, a hand-held computer, 'beeped' a message: 'bad dog, knock.' P knocked on Di's door but received no answer. She proceeded to the fenced-in backyard, rattled the gate and her keys and yelled 'gas company.' There was no response. She looked around the backyard for dogs or other animals. After satisfying herself that the yard was clear, she unhooked the gate and walked towards the meter. Two dogs approached her. One dog, a large German Shepard, jumped up, knocked her down and bit her on both arms, legs, and head. She escaped and was taken to a Medical Center. P sued D for damages both physical and mental. P saw a therapist on one occasion. The only gate to the backyard was the gate utilized by P in entering the yard. D stated that a large 'Beware of Dog' sign was posted on the gate. Over 10 years, D had spoken with several meter readers about his dog and told them they should not enter his yard if no one was home. The meter readers responded that they would comply with his request. When D was not at home the meter readers would estimate his bill, leave a card for him to mail in or come back at a later date. Thomas Waldron, an NJNG meter reader who had serviced the residence prior to P's injuries, confirmed that he had spoken with D about his dog, and had accommodated his request that he not enter the yard if no one was home. He denied that he had entered into a formal agreement with D. The jury returned a verdict in favor of P in the amount of $300,000. It also found that D had sustained his burden of proving that NJNG 'is responsible, in whole or in part, for the incident on the basis of a contractual obligation.' The jury apportioned fault sixty-five percent and thirty-five percent against D and NJNG respectively. D filed a motion for judgment notwithstanding the verdict or alternatively for a new trial. The trial court granted a new trial as to liability: D should have been permitted to introduce evidence of P's comparative negligence. P appealed.