I don't dispute whatsoever that, taken at face value, the establishment was entirely in the wrong, and not just for the little girl. Lacking some hygiene issue, it's just appalling that someone could be asked to leave a restaurant because their medical condition is "frightening."
But litigation is different, when the grandparents testify to how the little girl was traumatized by the restaurant, and then they're asked on cross-examination how the girl got the horrible trauma in the first place. "So you're outraged that the restaurant was insensitive to the maiming wounds and loss of an eye that your dogs inflicted on her?"
I really am not wanting to debate it, because it's all just horrible enough already. I simply have my doubts that litigation would be effective, and I've said why, and I'll leave it at that. Right now, I'm angry at the restaurant for kicking her out, if that's what happened, and for the grandfather for not keeping his pitbulls from chewing on her, if that's what happened. At the bottom line, we have a little girl who doesn't deserve any of this but has to live with the consequences probably forever.