Gee! What I read here was a human and a dog were running. Neither was aiming at the other or intending injury. There was a collision. The victim got hurt. That is unfortunate, but accidents happen in where no one is at fault.I think it's a stupid finding. Dog owners should be insurers of all damage and injury caused by their pet. Your pet, your responsibility.
Besides, do you really want judges choosing which breeds are dangerous and which breeds aren't? If a pit had run into her, would the conclusion have been different? The line of reasoning makes no sense.
The dog did not jump, did not bite. I bet the dog tried to lick the lady when she fell. Time to get real. Gotta stop some of this senseless litigation.