Case Background
This case unfolded in the Circuit Court of the Eleventh Judicial Circuit in Miami-Dade County, Florida. Plaintiff Yamila V. Chavez filed a lawsuit against her neighbors, Ariel Travieso, Mariolys Zayas, and John Travieso, after a serious dog attack that took place on August 20, 2023.
Ms. Chavez and the Defendants lived on adjacent properties in Miami, separated by a fence. The complaint stated that Ariel Travieso and Mariolys Zayas owned the neighboring property where the dog lived, and that all three Defendants owned or controlled the dog. The Plaintiff claimed the dog had been aggressive before and was dangerous. On the day of the incident, the dog allegedly escaped through a poorly maintained fence, entered Ms. Chavez’s property, and attacked her, biting her multiple times on different parts of her body. rt
Cause
The lawsuit alleged negligence and strict liability under Florida law. The Plaintiff said the Defendants knew or should have known their dog was dangerous, failed to control it, and neglected to maintain the fence separating the properties. This allowed the dog to cross into her yard and attack without warning. She claimed that the Defendants did not take proper precautions, such as reinforcing the fence or keeping the dog restrained.
Injury
The attack, according to the Plaintiff, caused multiple bite wounds, permanent scarring, and disfigurement. She also claimed lasting pain, both physical and emotional, including mental anguish, reduced ability to enjoy life, and ongoing disabilities. Doctors assessed that her injuries were permanent, and she would need future medical treatments and care for the rest of her life.
Damages
The jury awarded compensation to Yamila V. Chavez for past medical expenses and hospitalization, the cost of future medical care, past pain, suffering, and emotional distress, as well as future pain, suffering, disability, disfigurement, mental anguish, and loss of enjoyment of life.
Key Arguments and Proceedings
Plaintiff: Yamila V. Chavez
o Counsel for Plaintiff: Jake R. Vigil | Patrick H. McCain
Defendants: Ariel Travieso | Mariolys Zayas | John Travieso
o Counsel for Defendant: Janelle Ans | Anthony Gonzalez
Key Arguments by Counsel
Claims by Plaintiff
The Plaintiff’s legal team argued that the Defendants bore full responsibility for the attack. They told the jury that the dog’s owners failed to fix a fence they knew was defective. They emphasized that this was not an isolated mistake the Defendants allegedly knew about the dog’s dangerous behavior before the attack. The presence of a large, aggressive dog so close to neighbors, combined with a faulty fence, was described as a recipe for disaster.
They also reminded the jury of Florida’s strict liability laws for dog bites, which hold owners responsible when their dog bites someone, regardless of prior knowledge of aggression, as long as no legal exceptions apply. The Plaintiff’s counsel argued there was no valid excuse Ms. Chavez was on her property, not provoking the dog and the Defendants were obligated to protect their neighbors from harm.
Defense by Ariel Travieso
Ariel Travieso’s legal team categorically denied the allegations. In their answer to the complaint, they either denied key facts outright or stated they had no knowledge of them. They argued that the Plaintiff’s pleading was flawed, claiming she had only repeated legal elements without giving enough specific facts to back her negligence claim.
The defense also questioned whether Ariel was legally responsible under Florida law. They pointed to cases where a non-owner of a dog could not be held liable for attacks occurring outside the property where the dog was kept. They argued that the Plaintiff had not proven exact ownership or control of the dog.
Jury Verdict
After hearing evidence and arguments, the jury reached a verdict on April 3, 2025.
They found that both Ariel Travieso and Mariolys Zayas had been negligent, along with John Travieso, and that this negligence had been a legal cause of Yamila Chavez’s injuries. The negligence was apportioned as follows:
Ariel Travieso – 15%
Mariolys Zayas – 15%
John Travieso – 70%
Yamila Chavez – 0%
The jury concluded that Ms. Chavez had suffered a permanent injury from the dog attack and awarded damages totaling $3,579,474.01. They awarded her $53,634.01 for medical expenses and hospitalization she had already incurred, and $650,000 for the medical care she will require in the future. In addition, they found that she had sustained a permanent injury and awarded $189,440 for the pain, suffering, and emotional distress she had endured since the incident, along with $2,686,400 for the pain, suffering, disability, disfigurement, mental anguish, and loss of enjoyment of life that she is expected to experience in the years to come. Ariel Travieso, Mariolys Zayas, and John Travieso were held responsible according to their share of fault.
Court Document
