Dog bite law?
QUESTION: My dog recently bit my neighbor's ten-year-old (skin wasn't broken). She's not a vicious dog, but legally am I in trouble? answered by Robyn Tas ANSWER: Under U.S. law, dog bites inflicting injury or harm are unequivocally considered a "dangerous" activity for which liability may be imposed on the dog's owner. The potential imposition of liability depends upon the state or locality in which the incident takes place, as well as the specific facts of each case. The reason the determination varies nationwide is that some states rely upon common tort laws, which generally require a showing of fault on the part of the owner, while others rely on statutory laws, which impose strict liability for foreseeable injury regardless of a showing of fault.
An owner's common tort defenses include the contributory or comparative negligence of the dog bite victim, the victim's assumption of the risk, and the willful provocation on the part of the victim. Statutory Strict Liability States: Unlike states that rely on common tort law, others, which currently include, AL, AZ, CA, CO, CT, DE, D.C., FL, GA, HI, IL, IN, IA, KY, LA, ME, MA, MI, MN, MT, NE, NH, NJ, NY, OH, OK, PA, RI, SC, TN, UT, WA, WV and WI, statutorily impose strict liability upon a dog owner regardless of whether the dog showed a propensity to engage in conduct that was likely to cause injury or harm, or the owner's knowledge of said propensity. Generally, the only defense to strict liability is that the victim provoked the dog. Robyn Tas is an accomplished attorney with a diverse background in media, contract, corporate, intellectual property and employment law. Read more about Robyn Tas in the DogTime expert center... |
Comments
|



