Pennsylvania Does Not Always Hold Dog Owners Strictly Liable
In some states, dog owners are always on the hook if their dog bites someone, no matter what. These are called “strict liability” states. But in Pennsylvania, it’s a little more complicated. A dog owner can be held responsible, but only in certain cases. If a dog has bitten before, or shown signs of aggression, the owner should have known the dog was dangerous. When that’s the case, the law says they’re liable. But if the dog never showed signs of being dangerous, and the bite happened without warning, the owner might not be held fully responsible. The injured person would then have to prove that the owner was careless. That’s where the difference lies. In many other states, that step isn’t needed — the fact that a bite happened is enough.Victims in Pennsylvania Might Only Get Medical Costs in Some Cases
Another thing that sets Pennsylvania apart is how damages are handled. If a dog bites someone but was never aggressive before, the law may limit what the victim can recover. In that situation, the owner might only have to pay for medical bills. That’s it. Pain, lost work, or emotional suffering might not be covered unless the victim proves the owner was careless. Other states are more generous in this regard. Some allow bite victims to recover full damages — including pain and suffering — no matter the dog’s history. In Pennsylvania, you need to go a step further.“Highly Recommended” is the epitome of an understatement when it comes to the firm of McDonald At Law!! Michael McDonald’s genuine pleasant, and empathetic demeanor masks his legal astuteness, and the level of aggressiveness he implements in pursuit of a victim’s right and the monetary compensation legally entitled to us. I was involved in a motor vehicle accident at the hands of an intoxicated driver in York County. In my case I suffered what I described as an atypical injury, Mr. McDonald offered to be my Lawyer immediately after explaining to him the events leading to and after being struck in turn causing me to have a heart attack, when another law firm seemed hesitant. McDonald At Law secured a sizable monetary compensation that not only met my expectation but exceeded it. Mr. McDonald’s wealth of experience, and legal prowess is priceless and never did he act as the case was beneath his practice. In the end my family and I were well compensated, but also felt justified. Thank you McDonald At Law!!
- Miguel Lopez
There Is a Difference Between a “Dangerous Dog” and a Regular Dog
Pennsylvania law includes a category called a “dangerous dog.” If a dog has attacked someone before, or has tried to, and the act was not provoked, that dog might be labeled dangerous. Owners of such dogs have to follow strict rules. They need to register the dog, carry insurance, and secure the dog in a specific way. If someone is bitten by a dog already marked as dangerous, the owner faces heavier penalties and is more likely to be held liable for all damages — not just medical costs. Many states don’t have this kind of classification or don’t enforce it as closely as Pennsylvania does.The One-Bite Rule Doesn’t Fully Apply Here
Some states follow what’s called the “one-bite rule.” That means a dog gets one free pass. If it’s the first time the dog has ever bitten someone, the owner might not be held responsible. Pennsylvania mixes parts of this rule with others. In practice, this means that if a dog has never bitten or acted aggressively before, the owner might not face full liability — unless they acted carelessly in some way. This middle-ground approach puts Pennsylvania between full strict liability states and full one-bite states. That makes understanding the dog’s history and the owner’s actions even more important in any dog bite case.Related Videos
Putting off an Attorney due to Cost
Choosing a Personal Injury Attorney