default avatar
Welcome to the site! Login or Signup below.
Logout|My Dashboard

City to pay Lodi man bitten by police dog

Font Size:
Default font size
Larger font size

Posted: Saturday, March 3, 2012 12:00 am | Updated: 6:24 am, Sat Mar 3, 2012.

The city of Lodi has settled with a Lodi resident who received a scar on his face from a police dog who bit him while he was being arrested in April 2010.

Dean Newhall, 28, will receive $197,000 from the city plus $25,000 that was paid directly to Lodi Memorial Hospital for his medical bills, City Attorney Steve Schwabauer said.

Subscription Required

An online service is needed to view this article in its entirety. You need an online service to view this article in its entirety.

Have an online subscription?

Login now

Need an online subscription?



You must login to view the full content on this page.

Thank you for reading 20 free articles on our site. You can come back at the end of your 30-day period for another 20 free articles, or you can purchase a subscription at this time and continue to enjoy valuable local news and information. If you need help, please contact our office at 209-369-2761. You need an online service to view this article in its entirety.

Have an online subscription?

Login now

Need an online subscription?



More about

More about

More about

Rules of Conduct

  • 1 Use your real name. You must register with your full first and last name before you can comment. (And don’t pretend you’re someone else.)
  • 2 Keep it clean. Please avoid obscene, vulgar, lewd, racist or sexually oriented language.
  • 3 Don’t threaten. Threats of harming another person will not be tolerated.
  • 4 Be truthful. Don't lie about anyone or anything. Don't post unsubstantiated allegations, rumors or gossip that could harm the reputation of a person, company or organization.
  • 5 Be nice. No racism, sexism or any sort of -ism that is degrading to another person.
  • 6 Stay on topic. Make sure your comments are about the story. Don’t insult each other.
  • 7 Tell us if the discussion is getting out of hand. Use the ‘Report’ link on each comment to let us know of abusive posts.
  • 8 Share what you know, and ask about what you don't.
  • 9 Don’t be a troll.
  • 10 Don’t reveal personal information about other commenters. You may reveal your own personal information, but we advise you not to do so.
  • 11 We reserve the right, at our discretion, to monitor, delete or choose not to post any comment. This may include removing or monitoring posts that we believe violate the spirit or letter of these rules, or that we otherwise determine at our discretion needs to be monitored, not posted, or deleted.

Welcome to the discussion.


  • Darrell Baumbach posted at 1:46 am on Mon, Mar 5, 2012.

    Darrell Baumbach Posts: 9405

    Ron Warner stated...Could you imaging trying to get a jury of his peers... good thing it was settled out of court...

    I strongly agree with Ron... with the way this case went, this poor dog probably would have gotten 12 kitty cats on the jury who would have demanded severe punishment of some sort.

  • Ron Werner posted at 10:18 pm on Sun, Mar 4, 2012.

    Ron Werner Posts: 101

    Obviously the dog over reacted. Acted without direct orders from superior officers. I suggest paid administrative leave, limited wet food and perhaps sensitivity training for the plight of drug users. Thank god this issue was solved out of court. Could you imaging trying to get a jury of his peers. Hopefully the ASPCA will help Bronx if Mr Newhall decides to sue in civil court. Afterall this is a dog eat dog world.

  • roy bitz posted at 9:41 pm on Sun, Mar 4, 2012.

    roy bitz Posts: 503

    City of Lodi decision makers,

    The dog is the bad guy!
    Our police are bad guys because they didn't protect the real bad guy from the dog.
    What are the consequences for the "bad guy"?. Some well deserved pain--a scar and maybe some trauma and fear of dogs in the future--- and a lot of cash.
    I have a hard time understanding this decision given the pain he caused the dog and the police officers involved.
    I believe the city should have supported the police and the dog aggressively.
    In my view, the city took the easy way out here.
    We will never know if a jury would have awarded anything to this bad guy but from all I have read here----I doubt it. As for the need to call in experts and pay pay pay---I don't buy it.
    This is a piece of cake for our highly compensated city attorney----no need to put all that time and effort into defending the city. Just pay the victim off. No sweat.
    Please city council---stand up for our law enforcement officers in situations such as this one---don't just settle because it may cost more money to defend than to settle. I believe you "throw our police under the bus" when you take the easy way out.
    As for the money risk----You will spend more to remove and replace the unneeded (my opinion ) fire station #2 --- than you may have risked defending our police in this matter..

  • John Kindseth posted at 10:00 am on Sun, Mar 4, 2012.

    John Kindseth Posts: 245

    bob kempf: "...but afterwards he is a ward of the city of Lodi, and so being should be taken care of. "

    I guess someone forgot to tell the dog.

  • Mike Adams posted at 7:48 am on Sun, Mar 4, 2012.

    Mike Adams Posts: 1560

    Actually, I think the city got off pretty easy with this one. What would be the city's liability if one of the arresting officers started kicking and hitting the handcuffed arrestee while he was prone on the ground? Everybody (well decent people) would be
    screaming for justice.

    Why otherwise normal people would think it's ok to physically assault someone who has been arrested for a crime, not convicted, is beyond me. This was not a little nip at his ankle, this bite caused significant amount of damage.

  • Darrell Baumbach posted at 12:21 am on Sun, Mar 4, 2012.

    Darrell Baumbach Posts: 9405

    Bob, your point is well taken and if a police officer had done the damage after he was in control, then I might have more empathy... but the dog bite happened about the exact same time of the arrest.... it was not the next day or even a few hours later as I understand. The police dog was responding to the activity at the moment. I am saying the benefit of the doubt should go to the dog as the man was in the act of a felony. If we are going to have police dogs, then we have to allow for these kind of things .. just my opinion of course...

  • Bob Kempf posted at 11:59 pm on Sat, Mar 3, 2012.

    Bob Kempf Posts: 41

    I have to disagree on this one. At the point a suspect is detained they should not be exposed to torture, brutality, abuse or dog bitten. What happened during the fight to detain Mr. Newhall is on him, but afterwards he is a ward of the city of Lodi, and so being should be taken care of. This did not happen. Enough said. Most of you will disagree with me on this and that's ok. However one must not let there prejudice for what Mr. Newhall was doing just prior to the dog bite influence the law.

  • Darrell Baumbach posted at 8:17 pm on Sat, Mar 3, 2012.

    Darrell Baumbach Posts: 9405

    It has been our argument from the very beginning that no one is excusing Mr. Newhall's actions, and he was arrested justifiably so, but he did not deserve to be bitten," Newhall's lawyer Russell Humphrey

    Uh... I don't get it... why did he not deserve to be bitten... if fact, I think the dog should be compensated for having to use it's energy to deal with the situation. The person chose to take drugs, an illegal act. But for his actions, none of this would of happened. Normally when someone is engaged in a felony, that person should expect unfortunate things to happen as a result. Right? Instead, he is rewarded with more income than he possibly could have imagined. His reward should have been the scar that should remind him that there are consequences to illegal activity... amazing.

  • Debby Stapelberg posted at 12:40 pm on Sat, Mar 3, 2012.

    Collegegirl Posts: 5

    Maybe this victim can use the money to go to drug re-hab?!?

  • Robert Chapman posted at 11:21 am on Sat, Mar 3, 2012.

    Bob Chapman Posts: 997

    Considering his attorney will most likely get about $70,000 in fees, that leave about $127,000 for the "poor" victim of the dog bite. I vote that we set him up on a structured settlement of $1,000 a year for 127 years. If he doesn't like it he can always call J.G. Wentworth and get his money "NOW".



Popular Stories



Your News

News for the community, by the community.

Mailing List

Subscribe to a mailing list to have daily news sent directly to your inbox.

  • Breaking News

    Would you like to receive breaking news alerts? Sign up now!

  • News Updates

    Would you like to receive our daily news headlines? Sign up now!

  • Sports Updates

    Would you like to receive our daily sports headlines? Sign up now!

Manage Your Lists