Family of Boy Bit by Police Dog Awarded $58,840

The family of a boy attacked by a police dog in 1988 was awarded $58,840 by a Superior Court jury on Monday, despite suggestions by the family that more than $600,000 in damages be granted.

The jury award came despite a plea from the family’s attorney that it had been left with permanent emotional scars from the incident.

The verdict, which followed two days of deliberation, resolves a lawsuit filed by the family of Wesley Eaton, now 5, against the Oxnard Police Department. Wesley was attacked by Max, a 90-pound malinois, March 17, 1988, at the residence of the dog’s handler, Oxnard Officer James E. O’Brien.

Jurors were told that the wounds indicated that Wesley’s entire head was taken in the dog’s mouth and that the animal had bitten down, leaving punctures on the boy’s neck and a 2 1/2-inch gash on his scalp.

The suit is one of four civil actions filed against the department since 1987 by people who say they were attacked by police dogs.

Early in the trial, the city admitted responsibility for the attack, leaving the jury to determine how much the city should pay for medical and emotional damage.

The suit asked for an unspecified amount, but attorney Richard Bredlau suggested his clients deserved an award of about $630,000 for future earning losses, and physical and emotional damages.

The jury awarded $33,840 to Wesley to compensate him for emotional distress and medical expenses. It awarded his mother, Janet Eaton, an additional $25,000 for the emotional distress she suffered by witnessing the attack.

The jury decided not to award damages to Wesley’s brother, Michael Eaton, now 7, who the jury said suffered no emotional distress from witnessing the attack.

The attack occurred when Janet Eaton took her two sons to visit O’Brien, who was a family friend. As she stood at the front door talking with O’Brien’s wife, Wesley wandered into the back yard. The jury was told that the dog bit the boy’s head and neck before O’Brien came out of the house to separate them.

Janet Eaton and her husband, Richard, declined to discuss the verdict, referring all questions to Bredlau.

Bredlau played down the lower amount awarded by the jury. “They did what they thought was right and we are going to have to live with that,” he said of the jurors’ decision.

Becky McCarthy, the attorney representing the city, said she believed the award could have been even lower. But she said she was happy that it “came down to the neighborhood that we had talked about.”

During her closing arguments, McCarthy suggested that the Eaton family had exaggerated the extent of their emotional injuries. She suggested that Janet Eaton did not witness the entire incident and that Wesley will recover with minimal psychological help.

McCarthy suggested that the jury award Wesley between $10,000 and $15,000 and said Janet and Michael Eaton deserve no compensation because they suffered no emotional distress.

Maryanne Vreeland, the jury’s forewoman, said the jurors believed Wesley and Janet Eaton suffered no permanent emotional distress and would eventually recover from the trauma. She said jury members varied from $5,000 to $50,000 on the amount of damages they believed should be awarded to the Eatons.

“All I am saying is I hope they can go on with their lives, and I think that after this they will,” she said.

The four-week trial included separate appearances by Wesley and the dog, as well as tearful testimony from Janet Eaton and Wesley’s grandfather, David Eaton.

Janet Eaton testified that Wesley became more subdued after the attack and suffered nightmares about dogs.

Jurors heard varying opinions from two psychologists on the extent of the emotional distress suffered by Wesley. One suggested that the attack may have left permanent emotional scars on Wesley, while another suggested that the trauma could be addressed with minimal psychological treatment.

The suit initially named O’Brien as a defendant. But during closing arguments, Bredlau said the Eatons had decided O’Brien was not at fault and would not seek damages from the officer.