http://www.reviewjournal.com/news/las-vegas/bundy-sued-after-car-hits-cow-i-15 The guy is in a world of his own...
She should win. Hitting a cow is a serious impact and he does have an obligation to keep his cattle off the interstate. If he hadn't made the news earlier this year, this would be a non-story.
It was his families land before the interstate by gawd!!!! Them's federal roads which he doesn't redneckignize!!! Get them federal roads out of our states!!!!
Look, Cher's getting sued for being racist! http://www.tmz.com/2014/09/18/cher-sued-black-dancer-racial-discrimination-lawsuit/
The cattle are not the problem. The issue is that after his grandstanding to keep "his" land from the Federal and State Government, he puts the responsibility of land maintenance (fences) on the shoulders of the State. Which is it? Your land (and your responsibility to maintain) or their responsibility to maintain (and thus their land). The hypocrisy of his statement is what got me. If it's his land, he needs to take responsibility. If it's the State (or Federal) land, he shouldn't graze his herd. Sadly, I don't think that the person suing will ever see a dime.
Livestock escapes. There aren't even many farms left around here, and cows and horses still end up on the roads. It's just a fact of life.
If that was such a nonchalant fact of life, it would not be the top 3 concern of most ranchers I know. We are not talking about wilfred and dorthy with 10 heads of cattle here. 100+ heads of cattle can do serious damage.
Does anyone know if the land that Bundy is using, even though it has fences, is considered "open range?"
The lawsuit filed Sunday in Clark County District Court alleges Bundy “recklessly, carelessly and negligently allowed his cows to enter onto Interstate 15 through an area where he had no grazing or other rights.” How can he be responsible for the fences if they contend he has no grazing rights there? The crash occurred about 1:15 a.m. on April 14, less than 48 hours after the Bureau of Land Management abandoned its roundup and allowed Bundy to take back his impounded livestock following a tense standoff with the rancher’s supporters, including armed militia members from across the country. How do they prove those cattle weren't set loose by the government "agents"?
I said it was a fact of life, you added the nonchalant part. You going to tell me that they don't escape despite people's best efforts to contain them? Shit, a bull is going anywhere he pleases if he gets it in his head.
Funny, we have never had a bull escape the property. People make mistakes, animals get out. Does not mean that the owners should not be responsible for the damages done by those animals. Btw, no bull charges more than about 100 yards. after that, they go where you want them to go.
I don't see how this can even be debated. They're his cows, he has to ensure that they don't cause harm to others' life, limb, or property. If I let my dog loose and he bites a chunk out of the neighbor's ass, I'm liable for that person's hospital bills, and rightfully so. How the hell is a cow any different?
There are lots of open range areas in this country (i.e.; no fences along the roadway), usually posted as such. It is driver's responsibility to be aware and not hit the cows - and often is liable for owner's loss. In this case, not open range, but if it turns out State has responsibility to maintain fences along I-15 ROW (and I bet they do), then it gets blurry. Livestock has the right of way, especially in other countries.
My dad's team of Haflingers got out 2 years ago at 3 in the morning, woman hit one. Totaled the car, dad had to put the horse down. Now she's sueing him.