Massachusetts: Springfield jury awards $150,000 to mother of child injured by pit bull

MASSACHUSETTS -- A Hampden Superior Court jury has awarded $150,000 to a mother whose son was injured by a dog in May 2010.

The jury reached its verdict March 13 after a short trial in the civil suit filed on behalf of Lazarro Lopez by his mother Maria Lopez.

The jury found both the owner of the dog, Thomas Peralta, and the owner of the apartment building in which Peralta lived, Tomas Paris, negligent. It said that negligence resulted in damages to Lazarro Lopez.

The Lopezes were represented by Christopher and Jennifer Cava. Peralta and Paris acted as their own lawyers.

According to facts presented at the trial, Maria Lopez and her son – 18 months old at the time – were at 450 Hancock St. at about 8:30 p.m. on May 25, 2010, to look at an apartment to rent.

The pit bull was kept on a chain in the back yard of the property.

The young boy got out of the car in which he was sitting and went into the back yard, according to testimony. That's when he was attacked by the dog.

The dog, identified as a pit bull named Romy, attacked Lazzaro Lopez, biting his left ear off, causing tooth marks to his skull and lacerations on his face.

The boy was brought to Baystate Medical Center for trauma treatment and underwent plastic surgical repairs.

This is the chapter and section of Massachusetts general laws under which the action was brought against Peralta. It is a "strict liability" claim:

Chapter 140, Section 155: "If any dog shall do any damage to either the body or property of any person, the owner or keeper, or if the owner or keeper be a minor, the parent or guardian of such minor, shall be liable for such damage, unless such damage shall have been occasioned to the body or property of a person who, at the time such damage was sustained, was committing a trespass or other tort, or was teasing, tormenting or abusing such dog.

If a minor, on whose behalf an action under this section is brought, is under seven years of age at the time the damage was done, it shall be presumed that such minor was not committing a trespass or other tort, or teasing, tormenting or abusing such dog, and the burden of proof thereof shall be upon the defendant in such action."

(MassLive.com - March 18, 2015)