Dog Bite... "Do I have a case?" and "Is there a 'one free bite' rule" in Pennsylvania?

The most important things to know if you are wondering if you have a case:
1. was the dog that bit you unleashed?
2. was the dog roaming free off the property of its owner?
3. was the dog not under any person's control?

If the answer is yes to any of those three questions, most likely, there is a legal case for negligence.

THE LAW

In Pennsylania, an unleashed dog off the premises and/or not under someone’s reasonable control is a violation of Dog Law, 3 P.S. 459-305 (“Confinement of Dogs”). A bite occurring by such an unleashed, roaming dog off the premises in violation of Section 459-305 does not require you to prove the dog had a "dangerous propensity". (Miller v Hurst, 448 A2d 614 (Pa Super 1982): “The restraint requirement of the dog law is the standard to be utilized in determining whether a person has complied with the common-law duty to exercise ordinary care; (3) an unexcused violation of the dog law is negligence per se; and (4) evidence that defendant intentionally allowed his dog to run without restraint prior to time plaintiffs' six-year-old child was bitten by dog and injured was sufficient to make out a prima facie case of negligence.”; Liles v. Balmer, 567 A.2d 691 (Pa Super 1989): where dog ran out into street causing moped crash, “prima facie case of negligence can be established by evidence that dog has been allowed to run without restraint in violation of the dog law. 3 P.S. § 459- 305. Evidence of prior lack of restraint which permitted dog to run into street was not relevant in action arising from moped accident to prove negligent lack of control of dog at time of accident. 3 P.S. § 459-305.”)

WHERE THE DOG BITE HAPPENS ON THE PROPERTY OF THE OWNER

You must prove the dog had a "propensity to bite/attack". An old version of the law was referred to as the "1 free bite rule". This is no longer the case. If the dog bite happened on the owner's property, the "propensity to bite/attack" can be proven by the bite to you itself. Commonwealth v. Hake, 738 A.2d 46 (Pa. Cmwlth. 1999) (and Section 502A of the Dog Law) (the Hake case permitted a finding of a "propensity" to attack human beings by virtue of the attack in question, even if it is only the first attack).

If you have any questions or would like more information about the Pennsylvania Dog Law, feel free to call us.

David E. Schreiber
Of Counsel
Law Offices Of Thomas Wolpert, PC
(610) 792-3304

www.PAinjurycase.com