A person in a private home was negligent in causing a preventable dog bite that resulted in bodily injury to a minor child. Specifically, there was violation a well-known California safety requirement by failing to properly and safely restrain their dog. At the time of the incident, the minor child victim was lawfully on the at-fault party’s property pursuant to California Civil Code §3342 (including CACI 463). The incident was entirely preventable by the homeowner and the child engaged in no conduct that could support any apportionment of fault. The property owner’s Labrador charged and bit the minor child, causing permanent scarring.
LIABILITY
Given the above facts, I successfully argued that liability is not in dispute. Please also see Strict Liability, below.
STRICT LIABILITY
Because an actual bite occurred (teeth puncturing the skin), strict liability applies pursuant to California Civil Code §3342(a). See also Johnson v. McMahan (1998) 68 Cal.App.4th 173, 176 [80 Cal.Rptr . 2d 173]. Under these authorities, liability is unequivocal.
The anti–dog bite climate in California—and across the nation—reinforces the seriousness of this matter. Along with many other states, California places strict responsibility on dog owners to control and restrain their dogs. The California Legislature has made it clear that this is a public safety priority, and the property owner’s failure to comply is precisely the type of conduct the statute is intended to address.
Ultimately, we successfully resolved this dog bite case through a favorable settlement.
If you or someone you know needs an experienced personal injury trial lawyer, please feel free to contact me, Mark C. Blane, at (619) 813-7955. You may also download one of my free Injury Guide eBooks directly from my website at www.blanelaw.com.