An Act to amend and reenact § 46.1-299, as amended, of the Code of Virginia, relating to devices signalling intention to turn or stop and rules therefor.
Volume 1968 Law 99
Volume | 1964 |
---|---|
Law Number | 552 |
Subjects |
Law Body
CHAPTER 552
An Act to amend and reenact § 29-202, as amended, of the Code of
Virginia, relating to compensation for damage done by dogs.
[H 610]
Approved March 31, 1964
Be it enacted by the General Assembly of Virginia:
1. That § 29-202, as amended, of the Code of Virginia, be amended and
reenacted as follows:
29-202. Any person who has any livestock or poultry killed or
injured by any dog not his own shall be entitled to receive as compensation
therefor a reasonable value of such livestock or poultry; provided that in
the counties of Fauquier, Giles, Smyth, Wythe, Halifax, Pittsylvania,
Washington, Russell, Tazewell, Patrick, Rockbridge, Fairfax, Carroll,
Floyd and Grayson, the governing body may compensate the claimant upon
the basis of the assessed value of such livestock and the fair value of
unassessed lambs and poultry, but in no event to exceed the reasonable
value thereof. Nothing herein shall be construed as limiting the common
law liability of an owner of a dog for damages committed by it, and when
compensation is paid as above provided, the county or city shall be
subrogated to the extent of compensation paid to the right of action to
the owner of such livestock or poultry against the owner of the dog and
may enforce the same in an appropriate action at law. Claimants for
damages shall furnish evidence under oath of quantity and value to the
governing body of the county or of any city within ninety days after
sustaining such damage.
Provided, however, that if the governing body of the counties of Surry,
Carroll, Grayson, King George, Smyth, Wythe, Sussex and Floyd so pre-
scribe by ordinance, no payment by the county shall be made under this
section unless and until the claimant shall have exhausted his legal
remedies against the owner of the dog doing the damage for which
compensation under this section is sought; such governing body of such
county may require the submission of evidence that the claimant has
exhausted his legal remedies against the owner of the dog, if known;
and provided further that the governing body of the counties of Sussex
and Greene may prescribe by ordinance that no payment shall be made
by the county under the provisions of this section unless the owner of
such livestock or poultry shall have notified the game warden for such
county of his intention to make a claim hereunder and shall have afforded
such game warden an opportunity to view such livestock or poultry
within forty-eight hours after the death thereof; provided further, how-
ever, that, in addition to any other requirement, in the county of King
George, no such claim shall be allowed by the governing body thereof
unless the owner or custodian of such livestock notifies the sheriff of such
county, his deputy or the dog warden, of the alleged loss or damage to such
livestock within twenty-four hours of the time of the death of or injury
to such livestock; and such officer certifies in writing to the governing
body that he found physical evidence upon the animal or animals showing
that a dog or dogs caused such injury or death.