re: #78 leftynyc

In case anyone was wondering what this clown was up to these days:

talkingpointsmemo.com

Sadly, Bundy will probably be held not liable for the incident due to Nevada’s open range laws.

568.360. Duties of owners of domestic animals with respect to domestic animals upon the highway

1. No person, firm or corporation owning, controlling or in possession of any domestic animal running on open range has the duty to keep the animal off any highway traversing or located on the open range, and no such person, firm or corporation is liable for damages to any property or for injury to any person caused by any collision between a motor vehicle and the animal occurring on such a highway.

2. Any person, firm or corporation negligently allowing a domestic animal to enter within a fenced right of way of a highway is liable for damages caused by a collision between a motor vehicle and the animal occurring on the highway.

Number 2 might apply to Bundy IF it was his responsibility to maintain the fence. If it was installed by the State, then he gets to walk.

One thing you have to remember. These open range laws were written by Ranchers for Ranchers and are very hard to beat in Court.

BTW, Idaho’s open range laws are pretty much the same as Nevada’s