
Suit By Man Whose Car Killed Dog Is Thrown Out
Browse News
Pet Pulse Photo Illustration by Mike Lloyd
May 12, 2008
DULUTH, Minn. –- A judge threw out a suit Friday brought by a man whose car was damaged when it struck and killed a dog, after emotional testimony by one of the defendants, a co-owner of the late miniature pinscher.
Fester, a 13-pound dog was killed instantly on Jan. 4 near the city of Cloquet when hit by Jeffery Ely’s 1997 Honda Civic. Fester squeezed past owner Nikki Munthe as she was letting in her other dog and ran onto the road.
Ely sued the Munthe family for about $1,100 for damage to his car, time taken off from work to address repairs and court fees.
Both sides represented themselves, and neither could prove negligence by the other, so Judge Gerald Maher dismissed the case.
“You don’t have a legal cause of action,” Maher said. “You never should have been here.”
When Fester ran, Munthe says she yelled at him to come back, her cries intensifying when she saw Ely’s car headed straight for him. Ely says he didn’t see the mostly black dog until it was too late to slam on his brakes. After hitting Fester, Ely used his car’s headlights to help find his body.
“He killed our dog,” Munthe told the court. “Our dog had a soul. His car didn’t. His car is repairable. A soul is not.”
The judge also dismissed the Munthes’ countersuit for $2,400 for time missed from work, as well as costs to cremate Fester and buy a replacement dog.
Cloquet imposes leash laws, but they wouldn’t apply in this case because the Munthes live outside city limits. The code is intended for people walking their dogs, said Cloquet Police Chief Wade Lamirande, and say that no person should permit an animal to run at large.
Because the Munthes did not intend Fester to run outside unleashed, Lamirande said the code probably wouldn’t apply even if they lived within city limits.
Ely says he doesn’t plan to appeal. He told the Duluth News Tribune that all the media attention the case has received has ruined his reputation.
“The dog shouldn’t have been there,” he said. “Roads are for cars, not for dogs.”
Tell us what you think about “Suit By Man Whose Car Killed Dog Is Thrown Out” below. Share your favorite videos by clicking on the ZootooTV tab. Send us your story ideas by e-mailing us at news@zootoo.com or by calling us at 877-777-4204.
The Associated Press and The Duluth News Tribune contributed to this article.
Tags
How do you like this article?
Recent Videos
Latest Comments
Other news of the day
Pup’s Implant Gives Leg Up to Cutting Edge Surgery
FT. COLLINS, Colo. -– It’s hard ...
News Archive
Mayor Releases Shelter Dogs into Wild, Battle Ensues
NEW YORK -- When an Arkansas mayor r...
Animals’ Sixth Sense Predicts Bad Weather
CLEARWATER, Fla. -- With natural dis...
University Of Florida Unveils Shelter Medicine Program
GAINESVILLE, Fla. -– A new $1.7 mi...
'Kill List' E-mails Save Shelter Dogs from Death
GREENVILLE, S.C. -- A South Carolina...
Chicago Restaurant Law Allows Outdoor Doggie Dining
CHICAGO -- In Windy City eateries, d...




Comments
Page 1 of 3
Next3 weeks ago
Reply
1 month ago
Reply
1 month ago
Reply
2 months ago
Reply
2 months ago
Reply
The whole thing was an accident. I am sure he has car insurance, use it. And I could see his reputation being ruined. It sounded like he was a jerk to sue.
This country is "sue happy" and personally, I am sick of it.
2 months ago
Reply
2 months ago
Reply
2 months ago
Reply
2 months ago
Reply
2 months ago
Reply
2 months ago
Reply
2 months ago
Reply
2 months ago
Reply
2 months ago
Reply
2 months ago
Reply
2 months ago
Reply
2 months ago
Reply
2 months ago
Reply
If someone owned a big dog that bolted out the door by accident and then bit someone, then I am sure the leash law would come into play whether or not the owners intended the dog to run outside unleashed. I think most of the time, these incidents happen as a result of the dog sneaking out the front door or yard, or running loose without the owners intent.
2 months ago
Reply
The dog owners, should have leashed their two little doggies for safety. These guys probably hold the dogs in their lap and let them roam unfettered in the vehicle while they drive. Were these dogs obedience trained? Did they ever listen to the owners in the first place? If the dogs were trained well, then this all wouldn't have happened. It is sad for the dog that died that he didn't have more responsible owners.
I still think the dog owners should pay for the cost of the damage to the car. I don't think the car driver should pay for a replacement dog (which just goes to show you how little they actually cared for the one that died). It was their fault why the dog was killed in the first place.
2 months ago
Reply
It isn't the same as a pedestrian. I think we all agree that a pedestrian is a lot bigger and visible than a min pin, and also a pedestrian should know better and what to do when a car is coming at them. A little dog doesn't have a clue, and I think maybe they have that same problem that birds do, where they can't see the depth perception of a vehicle coming closer until it is too late.
I think it is really silly that the driver wanted to repair his 1997 Honda. It's not even a new car! I can see if he took really good care of it and it was immaculate.
2 months ago
Reply
2 months ago
Reply
2 months ago
Reply
2 months ago
Reply
Seems like the driver could have just went to his insurance and had it all covered. Isn't that what you would do if you hit a deer? I mean, who's fault is that?
2 months ago
Reply
2 months ago
Reply
2 months ago
Reply
2 months ago
Reply
2 months ago
Reply
2 months ago
Reply
2 months ago
Reply
2 months ago
Reply
Accidents are not planned ......
2 months ago
Reply
"Ely sued the Munthe family for about $1,100 for damage to his car, time taken off from work to address repairs and court fees."
Are you KIDDING ME?! He actually tried to sue for $1,100 because HE hit a thirteen pound dog?
At the VERY least I could see the car damages. But time taken off for work?? What the heck is that?! What an absolutely self-centered jerk.
2 months ago
Reply
2 months ago
Reply
2 months ago
Reply
2 months ago
Reply
2 months ago
Reply
2 months ago
Reply
2 months ago
Reply
2 months ago
Reply
2 months ago
Reply
2 months ago
Reply
2 months ago
Reply
2 months ago
Reply
2 months ago
Reply
2 months ago
Reply
2 months ago
Reply
2 months ago
Reply
Reply very smart judge. i feel badly for both parties but more so for the people who lost ther dog. he may have to pay for his car but it is a machine not a living being. i hope he has some compasion for the people who lost their dog a living being
2 months ago
Reply
2 months ago
Reply
2 months ago
Reply
2 months ago
Reply
2 months ago
Reply
2 months ago
Reply
It was good that that the driver of the car stopped to help find the dog rather than just driving off. More than likely the high emotions after the accident is what caused this stupid lawsuit.
It sounds like a lawyer recommended that they sue for the cost of a "replacement dog". It just sounds like the kind of thing a lawyer would recommend as well as the whole counter-suit. The people who lost their dog probably wouldn't have initiated a lawsuit like this but were dragged into it.
2 months ago
Reply
2 months ago
Reply
Really??? I'll keep that in mind when a child accidently runs out into the street and gets hit, and the driver wants to sue. Utterly ridiculous. He acts like the dog consciously decided he'd run in front of this guy, and that he'd just take over the road because he could. He was a DOG - they DO that sort of thing. Just like kids.
Great judge - he was fair and dismissed the whole the thing. It was a tragic event, but in this sue-happy world, it's good to see someone actually kept it all in perspective and not turn it into a money-making opportunity.
Condolences on the loss of the dog.
2 months ago
Reply
2 months ago
Reply
2 months ago
Reply
2 months ago
Reply
Page 1 of 3
Next