1. What could the rescue organization have done to avoid liability in this circumstance?

There are many things that the rescue organization should have done but didn't. The organization should have documented and flagged that the dog had an aggression issue. They then should have asked if the New Jersey man had any kids. They then should have disclosed to him that the dog had an aggression problem and would not have been a good fit for a family that has young children. Finally, if the man insisted that he adopt that particular dog the rescue organization should have made the man sign an adoption agreement that would have released them from any further liabilities involving that particular dog before they turned the dog other to him.

2. To what due process rights, in addition to those mentioned, will a dog owner be entitled?

There are a couple of different due rights that dog owners have that were not mentioned in the article. A dog owner can petition a court for an "... injunction to delay the killing of the dog until they have had the chance to be heard in court.' (filing for a petition for a preliminary injunction). The dog owner can also petition for a writ of mandamus which is "a judicial remedy issued by a superior court to compel a government officer to do or forbear from doing a specific act..." The dog owner can petition a higher court to delay the euthanasia order.

Reply to this comment in 150 words