Got to start with a definition:
property damage n. injury to real or personal property through another's negligence, willful destruction, or by some act of nature. In lawsuits for damages caused by negligence or a willful act, property damage is distinguished from personal injury. Property damage may include harm to an automobile, a fence, a tree, a home, or any other possession. The amount of recovery for property damage may be established by evidence of replacement value, cost of repairs, loss of use until repaired or replaced.
The boat owner held no negligence. The boat owner requested the police come onto his property when he reported the suspect in his boat, in as much as he gave implied consent to enter his property. The police did not appear to be negligent in that they did not do more damage then what one might expect in an apprehension.
The suspect, the kid, though, entered the property (the boat) with out the owners consent meaning he was trespassing on the boat property as well as the real estate. Second, the suspect was a fugitive from law enforcement and willfully took refuge in the boat without the owner’s knowledge or consent. The fugitive bled on the guys boat. The fugitive fired his gun at the cops, which gave the cops the right to fire back, so any damage caused by gunfire was because of the fugitives actions. So the probable cause of the damages to the boat ergo the blood stains, is the fugitive. The probable cause of any robot, flash bang, or gun fire damage done to the boat, because the fugitive did not surrender himself to the authorities, would be the fugitive’s failure to surrender to proper authority.
Ergo, the boat owner really ought seek a small claims action against the fugitive. The fugitive of course will not have the ability to pay that, and so I doubt any recovery could be made. Attempting to recovery against the police is very unlikely, as the police were acting on the authority of the owner to enter the property, and because the police were in performance of legitimate action based on probable cause, and based on the fugitive’s negligent actions. Unfortunately for the property owner, due to immunity protection given state officials in the operation of their duties, the injured property owner frequently
cannot recover under a tort claim unless he or she can prove unreasonable government activity.
The owner’s home or boat insurance may cover it as either damage caused by by fire and smoke, and vandalism. But it may also not cover it if listed as an exclusion for police activity.
In conclusion…….I don’t know.
Reply With Quote
Originally Posted by kygorski
