# Conn. court: Horse owners must prevent injuries



## stevenson (Sep 12, 2011)

this just makes ugly precedence. irresponsible parents and owner.


----------



## PaintHorseMares (Apr 19, 2008)

Since this ruling was only concerned with the summary judgement, I don't see this as changing anything.


----------



## JMaldaner (Mar 18, 2014)

Wow. I am trying to grasp what I just read.

In Kentucky, a horse owner needs to post a regulated sign on their property to limit their liability in the case of an accident. Here is the description of the sign from one of many suppliers.



So, by the court decision chronicled above, are we to understand that now in Connecticut there is no limit on the liability of the horse owner, that the horse owner now bears ALL the responsibility for any "foreseeable" incidents, based on the classification of the owner's animals, regardless of the actions of the third party?

The entire concept of "foreseeable" actions of a horse or other animal is so cloudy as to not offer any protection to the owner, in my opinion. Talk about a slippery slope! It would seem whomever can afford the best lawyer wins this one with the horse owner starting out with a severe disadvantage.


----------



## SlideStop (Dec 28, 2011)

I seems like people have lost responsibility for their own actions. Horses bite. Dogs bite. Llamas spit. Cats scratch. If your willingly interacting with an animals you accept these consequences. Just like when you drink hot coffee it's entirely possible you might burn yourself! Everyone is so quick point the finger and sue. So ridiculous.
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## bsms (Dec 31, 2010)

JMaldaner said:


> Wow. I am trying to grasp what I just read.
> 
> In Kentucky, a horse owner needs to post a regulated sign on their property to limit their liability in the case of an accident...


Kentucky law doesn't offer much protection. It says:

"KRS 247.401 to 247.4029 are intended to aid courts and juries in defining the duties of persons responsible for farm animals to others who have chosen to participate in farm animal activities. KRS 247.401 to 247.4029 also establish the policy of the Commonwealth of Kentucky that persons do not have a duty to eliminate risks inherent in farm animal activities which are beyond their immediate control if those risks are or should be reasonably obvious, expected, or necessary to participants engaged in farm animal activities. Furthermore, KRS 247.401 to 247.4029 establish the policy that the sponsor, instructor, or other professional engaged in farm animal activities who breaches a duty to a farm animal activity participant and causes foreseeable injury to the participant shall be responsible for the injury in accordance with other applicable law."

Kentucky Equine Activity Statut

It offers no protection if someone who goes to "pet the pretty horses" is bitten.

That is the problem. Folks rely on equine activity laws and in most cases, those laws do NOT cover "negligence". They have loopholes a lawyer can drive a trailer thru if he has a sympathetic client...such as a kid.


----------



## stevenson (Sep 12, 2011)

CA has no law. We can get sued if someone comes onto the property to steal the horses and gets hurt while doing so. All we have is trespass and illegall entry .


----------



## Chasin Ponies (Dec 25, 2013)

It's not a requirement to have this sign posted here in Ohio, but it sure is a good idea. It doesn't really provide any legal protection but it does make the un-informed think twice before suing.
It also doesn't help at all when people walk up to your pasture fence and start feeding your horses!!


----------

