Steven and Jessica Russell, as parent of Caroline Russell, a minor v. Charles and Sherry Baughman
Court & Case no.: settled prior to filing suit
Injuries: facial scars
Date: Dec. 8, 2009
Disposition: $150,000 settlement to parents of injured child
Plaintiff Attorney(s): Steven M. Crell, Cohen Garelick & Glazier, Indianapolis
Defendant Attorney(s): none
Insurance: Grange Mutual Casualty Co
Case Information: Caroline Russell was 6 years old when she visited a friend’s home in Ohio. She was
directed by the friend’s mother, the homeowner, to go to the garage to get ice cream. Caroline was attacked in the garage
by the homeowner’s dog and was bitten on her nose, mouth, and cheek.
Caroline required 42 stitches in her face and had to have subsequent plastic surgery to correct scarring caused by the attack.
She still has scars on her nose and lip that her plastic surgeon indicates will likely be permanent.
Because Caroline’s injuries occurred in Ohio at an Ohio residence, Ohio law controls. Ohio law differs from Indiana law in that a dog owner is strictly liable to a person injured by the dog so long as the injured person has not teased or provoked the dog, and so long as the injured person was legally in the presence of the dog and not committing a crime at the time of the attack.
Thus, in this instance, liability was fairly certain, and the proper amount of damages was the primary focus of settlement
negotiations. The homeowner’s insurance company agreed to a pre-suit settlement requiring payment to Caroline’s
parents for her benefit in the sum of $150,000. A minor’s compromise was approved by the Superior Court in Hamilton
County, where Caroline now lives.
- Steven M. Crell














Never heard of remand to another state. How often does that happen?
I highly recommend Deanna and her team of professionals that serve the legal community. Great information and many thanks for sharing.
they are pushing these cases against lawyers too far. thought-crime.
vagueness cannot challenged, so let's write all laws vaguely and throw the constitution out the window.Even if the court is operating under a particular law, if they don't it they will change it to their liking. What a joke!!!
Two convictions becomes one conviction with exactly the same sentence, only it is not clear wheter or not that sentence will be 18 months, 120 months or 138 months. Actually if the guns were in a home, whether or not they were his, he is protected under the 2nd amendment. Jurors need to learn the law and the constitution before judging others. The cour5ts need to do this as well.