Quote:
|
Originally Posted by ThunderBalls
I disagree. There is a legal term called detriment of reliability. Meaning if a professional advises you to follow a certain course of action and you suffer damages related to that then they are liable for your damages. Your analogy would be comparable if the wires held for the time they were supposed to and the dog did not heal. A more comparable situation would be if you broke your leg and the doctor placed a cast and the cast fell off the next day. The doctor would be responsible for his shoddy work, not you.
|
Sorry I didn't realize you dog suffered further damage due to the treatment he recieved. You only mentioned that the wires came out. Maybe they should have used a stronger glue so the dog could have pulled his teeth out instead. Then you would have a case for liability of damages. The glue did exactly what it was supposed to do. It held until your dog pulled it loose.
If A doctor placed a cast on my leg and I went home and tryed to pry my way out of it (as I'm sure your dog did with the wire) and the cast came off. I would have no case. And neither do you