If you are injured by a dog, then, generally, you must demonstrate that the dog owner or custodian was negligent.

The owners and/or custodians of dogs are responsible for property damage and personal injuries caused by their dogs when the owners and/or custodians are negligent.  Negligence is defined as the owner or custodian failing to use ordinary care as a dog owner/handler or acting in an unreasonable fashion.

In most all local jurisdictions have specific code provisions governing animal ownership and behavior, as well as other statutes prohibiting certain animal conduct.  Generally, statutory law prohibits a dog from running unrestricted (also known as “running at large”) or allowing the dog to be in the custody of someone who can not control the animal. In addition, these code provisions provide for definitions of "vicious" and "dangerous" dogs or animals and contain certain regulations that an owner must follow if a dog fits that definition.

For years, the old adage "every dog has one bite," commonly referred to as the "one bite rule,” had been accepted as a general concept of the law governing the dog owner’s liability.  This rule meant that a dog owner had no liability for his animal’s behavior until that dog had bitten someone (or some animal) and the owner knew of the “bad” behavior.  This general concept has been modified to some extent by most all local jurisdictions’ ordinances, as well as by common law.

Under the current state of the law, the facts of primary importance are really: 

1. what did the owner know about the animal’s prior behavior?
2. when did he know it?

Breed – Does It Matter?

Many animal experts feel that certain breeds of dogs are more dangerous or more vicious than others.  Lately, however, almost all local Virginia ordinances have specifically stated that a dog is not vicious or dangerous just because it is a certain breed.  (In light of the statistics previously provided in this book, I find the wisdom of these laws to be highly questionable.)  

As an example, the Fairfax County Code, states "no dog shall be found to be a dangerous dog or vicious dog solely because it is a particular breed, nor is a particular breed of dog prohibited."   Also, the Prince William County Code has no per se rule, which labels a certain breed of dog to be dangerous.

Running Unrestricted or At Large:

Most local Virginia ordinances require dogs to be leashed when off their property and/or to be maintained on their property by either a fence or some other obstruction.  Generally, the wording of these local ordinances is that “no dog shall run unrestricted.”  The word "unrestricted" has been defined as meaning not under the control of the owner or his custodian either by leash, cord, chain, electronic device or primary enclosure when off the property of premises of the owner or custodian

If an owner allows his dog to run unrestricted, then the owner or custodian is negligent as a matter of law whether or not the owner had knowledge that the dog had previously bitten someone or exhibited prior dangerous behavior. 

Incapable Custodian:

Most Virginia jurisdictions have ordinances that make it unlawful for any owner of a dog to place their dog or allow it to be placed in the custody of another person not physically capable of maintaining effective control of the dog.   

For example, if a 110 pound teenager is walking a 150 pound dog, then it could be effectively argued that the teenager was not physically capable of maintaining effective control, no matter the history of the dog’s behavior.

Who Is An Owner or Custodian?

The concept of “ownership” has been expanded by many local Virginia ordinances.  For example, in Fairfax County, an “owner” is defined as follows:

"Owner" shall mean any person, firm, partnership, corporation, association, or other legal entity, who has a right of property in an animal, keeps or harbors and animal, has an animal in his, her or its care, or acts as a custodian of an animal, including operators or managers or stables, kennels, pet shops, or other animal establishments."

Frequently, an issue raised in a dog bite personal injury claim is that the individual against whom a claim is made is not the actual “owner” or custodian of the animal, but rather it the true “owner” is another member of the family.  It is, therefore, important to determine who fits the legal definition of “owner” in each case in order to properly determine against whom the claim should be made.

This determination can be made by checking who feeds the animal; who takes the animal to the veterinarian; whose name is listed as the owner with the veterinarian; if there are any breeding papers which list the identity of the owner; and who else has access to the dog or animal on a regular basis.

As a practical matter, almost any family member can be considered an “owner” under the broad definitions of most local Virginia statutes and ordinances.  In addition, anyone who has custody of the dog including a neighbor or some other friend can be held to be an “owner” for purposes of liability.

For example, the true “owner” of the dog can go on vacation and place the dog in a neighbor's custody.  That neighbor can then place the dog in the custody of their child who in turn can have a third party walk the dog.  While the dog is walking, it breaks loose and bites a passerby.  Under such scenario, everyone who had a custody right or who had actual custody could be liable. 

Of course, if the dog was not known to be vicious or had never bitten anyone before, then the only liability would probably lie with the individual who was walking the dog at the time. 

If you or a loved one has suffered from a dog bite or animal attack, contact The Parrish Law Firm for a free consultation. We will use our experience, knowledge and resources to achieve the best possible results for you and your family.