Se habla Español | Wir sprechen Deutsch | Mówimy po polsku
Spanish Translation German Translation Polish Translation
Contact us for your initial consultation
847.577.8700
posted on 1/24/17

Washington police say a man justifiably used deadly force in self-defense, but the dog’s owners have issues with that conclusion.

Victoria and Jerrod Gladitsch keep Keiser, a rottweiler, in their backyard. Keiser apparently became agitated when a neighbor two doors down brought his dog outside, and broke away from his chain. The neighbor, who lawfully carries a .25-caliber pistol, shot at Keiser when it charged aggressively “growling and showing its teeth,” according to his statement. Keiser had been violent in the past, he added. Based on the fact that the neighbor reasonably feared that the dog would cause serious injury to himself or his animal, deputy police chief Jeff Stevens said no charges would be filed.

Ms. Gladitsch disputed the neighbor’s version of events, denied that Keiser had a history of violence, and indicated she might pursue a negligence claim.

Civil Liability in CCW Situations

Self-defense is essentially the same in both civil and criminal court. In either forum, the actors must basically establish that they reasonably feared for their safety to such a high degree that their use of deadly force was legally justified. However, the plaintiff or prosecutor side of the equation is completely different.

Prosecutors must prove all the elements of murder, assault, or any other gun-related crime beyond a reasonable doubt. Illinois law does not define this term, but it essentially means that the proof must be so overwhelming that a reasonable juror could only conclude that the defendant was guilty. However, in civil court, plaintiffs must only prove wrongful death, assault, battery, recklessness, and other torts (which just means wrongful acts leading to civil legal liability) by a preponderance of the evidence (more likely than not). In other words, civil liability for damages is much easier to establish.

The bottom line is that people now have the right to carry their own personal firearms in Illinois, and not everyone is terribly excited about that idea.

Defenses in Negligence Cases

While criminal self-defense has a rather broad geographic applicability (e.g. yards, porches, automobiles, etc.), civil courts are a little more reluctant to extend self-defense beyond the inside of a house. Furthermore, if there is any means of escape, courts normally do not allow self-defense claims. CCW licensees who have already retained attorneys have a distinct advantage here, since instead of beginning at square one while the litigation clock is already ticking, the lawyer is much more prepared to use self-defense against a tort claim.

Contributory negligence is another common tort defense. For example, in the above story, the CCW licensee could argue that the dog owner kept a dangerous animal and/or failed to properly restrain the dog. Illinois has a 51% rule, under which damages are reduced by the amount the defendant is at fault if under 50%. So, if the plaintiff was 50% negligent or more, the plaintiff receives nothing. Here again, additional preparation time often makes a significant difference.

There are other many other negligence defenses, such as assumption of the risk and lack of a legal duty that may apply as well, and an attorney must make this determination on a case-by-case basis.

Count on Experienced Attorneys

Weapons-based negligence cases can be complex, and require the assistance of a skilled legal professional. For a confidential consultation with an experienced criminal defense attorney in Schaumburg, contact Glasgow & Olsson.

(image courtesy of Jaclyn Clark)