Dog Bites & Vicious Canine Attacks

Ft. Lauderdale Dog Bite Lawyers

The personal injury attorneys at Levine and Glassman, P.A., are experienced in representing men, women and children who suffered a dog bite or other injury caused by a dog bite attack. These attacks by a vicious dog can often cause sever and permanent injures including scarring and disfigurement, nerve damage, and permanent disability. In the most serious cases, the dog can cause serious bodily injury or even death.

In many of these cases the dog's owner knows of the dogs propensity to attack but does little to protect individuals that come into contact with the dog. In many cases, the homeowner's insurance policy is required to cover the personal injury damages. In other dog bite cases, even someone other than the dog's owner can be held liable under a negligence standard.

We welcome your calls to discuss any dog bite case that occurred anywhere in South Florida, including the Miami - Fort Lauderdale - Pompano Beach Metropolitan Area in Miami-Dade County, Broward County, and Palm Beach. Let our personal injury attorneys talk with you about any dog bite or vicious dog attack case to determine whether you are entitled to file a lawsuit to collect money damages.

Money Damages for Personal Injuries Cause by Dog Bites Under Florida Law

Florida law provides for money damages in certain cases for dog bite injures which can include compensation for the following:

• medical bills;
• pain and suffering;
• humiliation;
• embarrassment;
• mental anguish;
• loss of the capacity for the enjoyment of life;
• loss of consortium claims; and
• future medical bills.

Dog Bite Liability Under Florida Law

The dog injury statutes under Florida law impose strict liability on the owners of any dog that bites or attacks another person even if the owner had no reason to believe that the dog was dangerous. The Florida legislature considered this remedy as necessary, but it also recognized the strict liability standard to be rather harsh. The legislation was intended to limit the types of defense available to the dog's owner to escape paying for the damages.

Under Florida Statute Section 767.01, "Owners of dogs shall be liable for any damage done by their dogs to a person..." under a strict liability standard that does not require any showing that the owners knew of the dogs dangerous propensities to attack or bite a human being.

Under Florida Statutes Section 767.04, "the owner of any dog that bites any person while such person is on or in a public place... is liable for damages suffered by persons bitten...."

Defenses to Strict Liability Applies to Both Statutes

After a dog bite case, it is important that your personal injury attorney file investigate the case to preserve all of the evidence including pictures of your damages and medical records. Your attorney will also want to preserve evidence to show that the plaintiff did not contribute to the injuries by provoking the dog or that the dog owner did not warn the plaintiff of the dog's potential to attack through a "bad dog" sign displayed on the property.

The Bad Dog Sign Defense

The "bad dog" signage defense is an affirmative defense and the burden is on the defendant to assert and prove the defense. This defense provides that a dog owner is not liable for personal injury claims for injuries that occurred on the dog owner's property if at the time the injury occurred, the owner displayed in a prominent place an easily readable sign that says "Beware of Dog." The defense does not apply if the dog bite or attack hurt a child under the age of six (6) years old.

Defense of Comparative Negligence - Provocation Defense

The provocation defense basically means that the dog owner should not be held liable for the damages to the extent that the plaintiff's negligence caused the injury. The theory behind this defense is that if the plaintiff knowingly and voluntarily risked being injured by the dog then the strict liability rule should not apply. For instance, if the plaintiff did any of the following: kicked, hit, pushed, taunted, or otherwise provoked the canine into reacting then the plaintiff's damages should be reduced by the same percentage that the plaintiff's negligence was responsible for the damages.

The case law is well-settled that under the dog bite statute a comparative negligence standard applies under which “any negligence on the part of the person bitten that is a proximate cause of the biting incident reduces the liability of the owner of the dog by the percentage that the bitten person’s negligence contributed to the biting incident.”

The Provocation Defense Applies to Both Florida Dog Bite Statutes

Defenses for “comparative negligence” are not explicitly found in Florida Statute 767.01, which was adopted long before the dog bite statute. In fact, the Courts have consistently held that the defenses contained in Florida Statute Section 767.04 apply equally to claims under Florida Statute Section 767.01. See e.g., Kilpatrick v. Sklar, 548 So. 2d 215, 74 A.L.R.4th 1111 (Fla. 1989); Staniszeski v. Walker, 550 So. 2d 19 (Fla. 2d DCA 1989).

The previous version of Fla. Statute Section 767.04 provided that “no owner of any dog shall be liable for any damages to any person or his property when such person shall mischievously or carelessly provoke or aggravate the dog inflicting such damage.” (emphasis added). This same defense of “provoke or aggravation” of the dog is included within the comparative negligence standard referenced in the current version of the statute. Referring to the prior defense of aggravation and provocation, the Court in Donner v. Arkwright-Boston Manufacturers Mutual Insurance Company, 358 So.2d 21 (Fla. 1978), stated that “the legislature apparently felt that good morals dictated that if a person kicks, teases, or in some other way provokes the dog into injuring him, he should not be compensated.” Id. at 24.

Statutory Limitations on Liability for Dog Bite Cases

In the following types of dog bite cases, statutory defense under Florida law act to limit liability, including:

• protections for veterinarians or other veterinary clinic employees;
• individual employed by animal control services or recognized animal shelters working with stray dogs;
• state or local municipality employees working within the scope of their employment;
• state or local law enforcement officers that use dogs for law enforcement of correctional purposes or training;
• service dogs being used to provide assistance to a person with a medical diability;
• dogs that attack a person involved in criminal activity such as a burglary or robbery;
• dogs that are on a leash and under control;

In certain cases, the person injuried may seek to recover damages from someone other than the owner of the dog. In those case, the strict liability statute does not usually apply. Instead, the negligence standard generally applies. Under the negligence standard, the dog's known propensities may become an important issue in the case. In other words, if the defendant know that the dog was dangerous, then that knowledge can create some duty on the person's part to protect other people that come into contact with the dog.

Warning signs that the dog may be dangerous can include warning signs such as previous dog bites or attacks, barking at stangers or guests in the home, jumping up on people, frightening individuals, complaints about the dogs, or fighting with other dogs.

Conclusion

If you have been the victim of a dog bite injury or attack by a vicious canine throughout South Florida, including the Fort Lauderdale - Pompano Beach - Miami Metropolitan Area for Broward County, Miami-Dade County, or Palm Beach County, then contact a personal injury attorney at Levine and Glassman, P.A., to discuss how much your claim might be worth under either a negligence or strict liability standard.