Dog bites are traumatic, both physically and emotionally. Whether it’s a child injured while visiting a friend’s home or an adult attacked while walking down the street, dog bite injuries can lead to medical costs, lost wages, and long-term consequences. When these incidents occur, the law steps in to determine responsibility. But not all states treat these cases the same. Some impose strict liability, holding dog owners accountable regardless of the dog’s past behavior, while others follow the traditional one bite rule.
Understanding how your state handles dog bite liability is crucial. In this article, we’ll explore how the one bite rule vs. strict liability laws apply in California, Nevada, Colorado, Florida, Washington, and New York, states where legal consequences differ significantly for dog owners. We’ll explain the general rule behind each legal doctrine and how dog bite victims can protect their legal rights under state law, however, it’s essential to seek legal advice catered to your specific case from a qualified dog bite attorney.
The One Bite Rule: What It Means and How It Works
The one bite rule stems from old common law. It essentially gives the dog and the owner one free bite before legal consequences apply. In states that follow this rule, dog owners avoid automatic liability for the first bite unless they already knew their dog was dangerous
In simpler terms, the owner must know or should have known that the dog had a tendency to bite or act aggressively, otherwise known as the dog’s “dangerous propensities.” If a dog has never shown signs of biting or attacking and suddenly injures someone, the owner may avoid liability under this doctrine.
However, once a dog shows signs of aggressive behavior or has a known history of mischief or violence, even something as minor as growling or snapping, this can count as prior knowledge. After that, the dog owner is on notice. If another incident occurs, the dog owner could be held liable if they were aware of the dog’s dangerous behavior.
Strict Liability: Holding Owners Accountable Regardless of a Dog’s History
Strict liability means the dog owner is legally responsible for injuries caused by their dog, regardless of whether the dog had previously bitten someone or shown signs of aggression. There is no need to prove the owner’s knowledge regarding the dog’s propensity.
This approach removes the burden from bite victims to investigate the dog’s past or the owner’s actions. Under strict liability laws, if a dog caused harm, the owner is strictly liable, plain and simple.
Strict liability laws serve an important purpose: they emphasize the dog owner’s responsibility to maintain reasonable control over their animal, especially in public settings or on the dog owner’s property. This legal approach protects public safety and reduces the likelihood of future dog bites.
However, even strict liability cases can have exceptions. For example, the victim may not recover damages if they provoked the dog or were trespassing on private property. Still, these laws provide stronger protection for those who suffer serious physical injury due to dog bite attacks.
California Dog Bite Laws: A Clear-Cut Strict Liability State
California imposes strict liability for dog bite injuries under California Civil Code § 3342. If a dog bites someone in a public place or lawfully on private property, including the dog owner’s property, the owner is strictly liable for the harm caused.
There’s no “one free bite” in California. The law applies even if the dog has no known history of aggression. As long as the victim didn’t provoke the dog and was legally present, the owner can be held liable.
Examples of when strict liability applies in California include:
- A jogger bitten by a dog not on a leash in a public park
- A mail carrier suffers an attack while delivering mail to a home
- A child gets bitten while visiting a neighbor’s house.
Victims can claim compensation for medical treatment, lost wages, and other damages stemming from the dog bite. California’s clear standard helps bite victims secure compensation for medical expenses without needing to prove prior knowledge of the dog’s dangerous behavior.
Colorado: A Strict Liability State for Serious Injuries
Colorado’s dog bite statute, C.R.S. § 13-21-124, imposes strict liability when a dog causes serious bodily injury or death. In these cases, the dog owner is strictly liable, even if the dog has never shown aggressive behavior or had a history of biting.
However, the statute does not apply to minor injuries or property damage. For those claims, victims must prove negligence under other legal theories. Strict liability in Colorado only covers severe cases, those involving substantial medical harm or fatal attacks.
The law defines “serious bodily injury” based on C.R.S. § 18-1-901(3)(p), which includes:
- Substantial risk of death
- Permanent disfigurement
- Protracted loss or impairment of any bodily function
To hold the dog owner liable, the bite victim must have been lawfully on the property and must not have provoked the dog. If the victim trespassed or knowingly provoked the dog, the owner may avoid liability.
Colorado also maintains a separate statute, C.R.S. § 18-9-204.5, that allows authorities to classify a dog as a “dangerous dog” after an attack. Once designated, stricter restrictions and penalties apply to both the dog and the owner if another incident occurs.
Florida: A Strict Liability State with a Twist
Florida Statute § 767.04 enforces strict liability for dog bites. If a dog bites someone in a public place or lawfully on the owner’s property, the dog owner is strictly liable, regardless of the dog’s past behavior.
However, Florida law includes a comparative negligence clause. If the bite victim provoked the dog or behaved carelessly, the amount of compensation may be reduced in proportion to the victim’s fault.
For example:
- If a victim ignored a clearly visible sign that stated ‘Bad Dog’ in compliance with Florida law, the court may reduce the compensation awarded.
- If a child is bitten while playing unsupervised with the dog, the court might consider parental negligence.
This legal structure aims to balance dog owner accountability with bite victim responsibility. It also underscores the importance of maintaining clear warnings and obeying local regulations, such as leash laws or signage requirements.
New York: A Mixed Rule State with Limited Strict Liability
New York is unique in that it blends both approaches. Under Agriculture & Markets Law § 123, dog owners are strictly liable for the victim’s medical expenses if the dog is legally declared a dangerous dog. To recover other damages, such as pain and suffering or lost wages, the victim must show that the dog had a known history of aggressive or mischievous acts.
The law distinguishes between standard domestic animals and those previously declared dangerous dogs. Once a dog is labeled dangerous, stricter legal consequences apply to the owner.
New York courts often assess:
- The dog’s history of bites or aggression.
- Whether the owner took reasonable steps to avoid future incidents.
- Whether the victim provoked the dog or was lawfully on the premises.
This hybrid system requires bite victims to gather strong evidence and, in many cases, prove negligence in addition to strict liability.
Washington: Modified Strict Liability with Local Enforcement Variations
Washington follows a strict liability approach under RCW § 16.08.040. If a dog bites someone in a public place or lawfully on private property, including the dog owner’s property, the owner is strictly liable for damages. This applies even if the dog has never bitten before or shown any aggressive behavior.
However, Washington courts recognize exceptions. The owner may avoid liability if the bite victim was:
- Trespassing
- Committing a crime
- Provoking the dog
Washington also allows courts to declare a dog “potentially dangerous” or “dangerous” under RCW § 16.08.070, which triggers additional legal requirements like registration, secure confinement, and muzzling. Once a dog receives this designation, future dog bite attacks carry more severe legal consequences for the owner.
Nevada: A One Bite Rule State with Unique Considerations
Nevada follows the traditional one bite rule, meaning dog owners may only be held liable if they knew or should have known their dog had dangerous propensities. This principle was reaffirmed in Harry v. Smith, 893 P.2d 372 (Nev. 1995), where the Nevada Supreme Court ruled that a dog owner is not liable for a first-time bite unless prior knowledge of the dog’s dangerous behavior can be proven. In short, Nevada courts may excuse liability for a first bite if the victim cannot prove the owner’s prior knowledge of the dog’s dangerous behavior.
However, Nevada law has evolved through local laws. For instance, in Las Vegas, municipal code § 7.36.030 requires dog owners to keep their pets on a leash at all times when off their property. If a dog bite occurs because the owner violated this local leash law, the court may consider that negligence per se a form of automatic negligence.
Nevada also distinguishes between working dogs, like a hearing dog or guide dog, and standard domestic animals. While protections exist for service dogs, owners are still required to prevent injuries caused by careless management, especially on public property.
To succeed in dog bite claims in Nevada, victims must gather strong evidence, such as:
- Prior complaints to animal control
- Testimony of aggressive behavior
- Proof of leash law violations
- Witness statements documenting the attack
Know Your State’s Dog Bite Laws: Your Rights Depend on It
Dog bite laws vary widely across states, and the difference between the one bite rule and strict liability can determine whether a victim receives compensation or walks away with unpaid medical bills.
Dog bite cases vary significantly depending on the state’s legal framework. In one bite rule states, victims must often show that the dog owner knew about the dog’s dangerous propensities before liability applies. In contrast, strict liability states hold owners accountable regardless of prior behavior, making it easier for victims to pursue compensation.
If you or a loved one suffered dog bite injuries, understanding your legal options under your state law is crucial. You shouldn’t have to pay for medical treatment or lost wages out of pocket, especially when the law protects you from harm caused by careless management or a dangerous dog.
At Bourassa Law Group, we’re committed to helping dog bite victims across multiple states understand their rights and pursue compensation. Contact us for a free consultation to explore your options and ensure your voice is heard.
1-800-870-8910