Quantcast

Plaintiff injured visitor sues Linda Mar Rehabilitation for Negligence after Dog Attack

NORTHERN CALIFORNIA RECORD

Wednesday, January 15, 2025

Plaintiff injured visitor sues Linda Mar Rehabilitation for Negligence after Dog Attack

State Court
Webp s3se8xmjipo5y0vlczn9011qv2bn

Superior Court of California - County of San Francisco | Official website

A shocking incident involving a dog attack has led to a legal battle as a plaintiff seeks justice for the injuries sustained. On December 27, 2024, Ross Nadel filed a complaint in the Superior Court of California, County of San Francisco, against Linda Mar Rehabilitation and unnamed defendants. The case highlights allegations of negligence and strict liability under Civil Code § 3342 due to an unprovoked dog attack.

The lawsuit stems from an incident on April 6, 2024, when Ross Nadel was lawfully present at the property located at 751 San Pedro Terrace Road in Pacifica, California. According to the complaint, an employee of Linda Mar Rehabilitation brought a dog onto the premises, which subsequently attacked Nadel. The attack resulted in severe personal injuries including sepsis and exacerbation of a preexisting heart condition. The plaintiff accuses Linda Mar Rehabilitation and associated parties of failing to control the dog despite being aware of its aggressive tendencies. "Defendants knew or should have known that their failure to restrain the dog made it highly probable that the dog would cause harm," states the complaint.

Nadel's legal team argues that Linda Mar Rehabilitation and other defendants were negligent in their duty to ensure safety on their property by allowing an aggressive animal to be present without proper supervision or restraint. They claim this negligence directly led to Nadel's injuries. Furthermore, they assert that defendants violated California Civil Code § 3342 by not keeping the dog under direct care, thus breaching laws designed to protect individuals from such attacks.

In seeking redress from the court, Ross Nadel is pursuing general (noneconomic) damages for pain and suffering, special (economic) damages related to medical expenses incurred due to his injuries, costs of suit, pre-judgment interest according to law, and any further relief deemed appropriate by the court. This case underscores significant issues surrounding premises liability and animal control responsibilities within business environments.

Representing Ross Nadel are attorneys Douglas S. Saeltzer and Ian A. Head from Walkup, Melodia, Kelly & Schoenberger law firm. The case is filed under Case No. CGC-24-621030 with a demand for jury trial in pursuit of justice for Nadel's grievances.

More News