According to the law, when it calls for performance of a reasonable action, the owner of a pet dog must prevent that same canine from attacking men, women and children. So, how does that law apply to each case of a dog attack?
When the legal system exercises the principle of strict liability
Strict liability comes into play when the dog is located on the owner’s property, and when that same pet tries to bite someone. Animal lovers should note the legal definition for a dog’s owner. It could be someone that has purchased the pet canine, or it could be someone that has been put in charge of controlling that same canine.
Was the biting canine provoked?
The team defending the dog’s owner normally seeks the answer to that question. The legal system in most states allows application of the principle of comparative negligence. In other words, if the victim caused a certain percent of the damage, then he or she must accept a reduction of the compensation that is of the same proportion.
There is also another situation in which the victim’s compensation could get reduced. That reduction would get made, if evidence revealed the existence of a certain circumstance. That would be a circumstance in which the victim has ignored a warning. Failure to heed a dog owner’s warning counts as a form of provocation.
If a pet dog bit a trespasser, could that same trespasser get compensated?
Normally if someone that has not been invited, or someone that is not anticipated comes onto a property, then he or she has no right to claim compensation for a dog bite. Still, there are some exceptions to that general rule, as per injury lawyer in Grand Prairie.
Suppose, for instance, that the owner’s dog frightened the stranger/trespasser with it’s barking, and made him or her too frightened to move. Suppose then that the dog’s owner told the barking canine to attack the frightened individual.
If the canine’s attack resulted in harm to the trespasser, then the attacked person could sue the canine’s owner. Hence, if the attack caused the stranger/trespasser to sustain a dog bite, then the owner would need to compensate for that damage.
Consider a different scenario, one in which the owner does not come onto the scene, but the dog’s limb steps on a rake. Suppose, too that the same rake had had a broken branch resting on it. In other words, the branch would come up and hit the stranger/trespasser.
If that flying branch caused an injury, then that dog’s owner could be sued. He or she could be charged with negligence. The plaintiff’s lawyer could argue that a reasonable person would have placed the rake upright against a wall.