‘Vicious’ Dog Attack At Pottstown Residence Apurs Lawsuit Against Dog Owner, Landlord

Map of Pennsylvania highlighting Montgomery County

Map of Pennsylvania highlighting Montgomery County (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

NORRISTOWN, PA — A Limerick woman who allegedly was attacked by dogs and a Lower Pottsgrove man who was injured as he came to her rescue outside a Wilson Street residence in Pottstown have sued the borough man who owned the dogs.

Kaitlyn Fadely, 19, of Major Road, Limerick, and Kurt Buchler, 44, of Foxtail Drive, Lower Pottsgrove, filed separate lawsuits in Montgomery County Court against Robert Schrack, of the 600 block of Wilson Street, Pottstown, alleging they were “violently attacked without provocation” by dogs owned by Schrack about 4:11 p.m. March 15.  The suits each seek damages in excess of $50,000.

“At all times…relevant, the defendant knew that the dogs were of a ferocious, vicious and mischievous nature and accustomed to attack and bite humans,” Skippack lawyer Gerald J. Mullaney Jr. alleged in the lawsuit filed on behalf of Buchler and his wife, Michelle.

Also listed as a defendant in each of the lawsuits was Glenn Waldt, of the 2800 block of East High Street, Lower Pottsgrove, who owned the Wilson Street residence and who rented it to Schrack, according to court papers.  A lease agreement was established between Schrack and Waldt in November 2011, court papers alleged.

Read more:  http://www.pottsmerc.com/article/20130514/NEWS01/130519728/-vicious-dog-attack-at-pottstown-residence-spurs-lawsuit-against-dog-owner-landlord#full_story

2 comments on “‘Vicious’ Dog Attack At Pottstown Residence Apurs Lawsuit Against Dog Owner, Landlord

  1. I got a call yesterday from a new homeowner. He said his wife was talking their toddlers for a stroll when a couple of pit bulls charged the fence that was only 3′ high. Now, they don’t feel safe walking the downtown neighborhood as they’ve done nearly every day.

    Some insurance companies are wising up. They have pet size & weight limitations on policies for rentals. In other states, they have all but refused insurance to people who own pit bulls, (not that I totally agree with that stance), but the liabilities are just too astronomical.

    It’s a puzzle to me that insurance companies would even agree to insure about 90% of the rentals in Pottstown as it is…with or without dogs.

  2. You would think the insurance companies would take a more proactive role as they are on the hook for big bucks when claims are submitted. Evidently they are as useless as Codes when it comes to enforcing the rules! It’s not like that word about Pottstown’s rental problems isn’t on the internet and easy to find!

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s