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 | 1952 |
---|---|
Law Number | 367 |
Subjects |
Law Body
CHAPTER 367
An Act to amend and reenact § 29-202, as amended, of the Code of
Virginia, relating to compensation for livestock and poultry killed
by dogs.
. fH 581]
Approved March 31, 1952
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 tn
the counties of Fauquier, Pittsylvania, 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 subro-
gated to the extent of compensation paid to the right of action of 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 county of Surry,
Carroll, Grayson and Floyd so prescribe 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 govern-
ing body of such county may require the submission of evidence that the
petal has exhausted his legal remedies against the owner of the dog,
i own.