| In my last article, "How to Make a Claim in | | | | or dangerous just because it is a certain |
| Virginia for Injuries Due to a Dog Bite," we | | | | breed. |
| discussed some basic laws and other practical | | | | |
| issues such as how homeowner's or renter's | | | | As an example, the Fairfax County Code, |
| insurance protects dog owners in these types | | | | states "no dog shall be found to be a |
| of situations and provides compensation to | | | | dangerous dog or vicious dog solely because |
| those persons who are hurt by dogs. | | | | it is a particular breed, nor is a particular |
| | | | breed of dog prohibited." |
| Now, I would like to provide you some more | | | | |
| specific information about the current state | | | | Also, the Prince William County Code has no |
| of the law surrounding dog bites and things | | | | per se rule, which labels a certain breed of |
| you need to know if you intend to pursue a | | | | dog to be dangerous. |
| claim for injuries sustained in a dog bite or | | | | |
| attack. | | | | Another frequently asked question is whether |
| | | | the law will consider the dog owner to be at |
| As discussed in the last article, in order to | | | | fault for his dog's behavior if the dog is |
| successfully recover compensation (or money) | | | | running off the dog's property without any |
| for injuries due to a dog bite, you must show | | | | sort of restraint. |
| that the dog owner or custodian's behavior | | | | |
| was negligent or unreasonable. | | | | The answer to that question is yes. |
| | | | |
| Many people often ask me whether certain | | | | Most local Virginia ordinances require dogs |
| breeds of dogs, like rottweillers or pit | | | | to be leashed when off their property and/or |
| bulls, are automatically considered dangerous | | | | to be maintained on their property by either |
| by the law and if such dogs bite or attack | | | | a fence or some other obstruction. |
| are their owners or custodians automatically | | | | |
| negligent. | | | | Generally, the wording of these local |
| | | | ordinances is that "no dog shall run |
| Surprisingly, the answer is no, even though | | | | unrestricted." The word "unrestricted" has |
| many animal experts feel that certain breeds | | | | been defined as meaning not under the control |
| of dogs are more dangerous or more vicious | | | | of the owner or his custodian either by |
| than others. | | | | leash, cord, chain, electronic device or |
| | | | primary enclosure when off the property of |
| According to a study recently completed by | | | | premises of the owner or custodian. |
| Merritt Clifton, editor of Animal People, Pit | | | | |
| Bulls, Rottweilers, Presa Canarios and their | | | | If an owner allows his dog to run |
| mixes are responsible for 74% of attacks as a | | | | unrestricted, then the owner or custodian is |
| whole and 68% of the attacks upon children. | | | | negligent as a matter of law whether or not |
| | | | the owner had knowledge that the dog had |
| In his study, Mr. Clifton states, "Pit Bulls | | | | previously bitten someone or exhibited prior |
| and Rottweilers are dogs who not only must be | | | | dangerous behavior. |
| handled with special precautions, but also | | | | |
| must be regulated with special requirements | | | | The law controlling dog bite/attack claims is |
| appropriate to the risk they may pose to the | | | | very complex and I urge you to keep your eyes |
| public and other animals, if they are to be | | | | open for the next installation in this |
| kept at all." | | | | series, which will hopefully continue to |
| | | | educate about the law and how it may apply to |
| Despite the opinions of these experts, almost | | | | you or someone you love who has been bitten |
| all local Virginia ordinances have | | | | or otherwise injured by a dog. |
| specifically stated that a dog is not vicious | | | | |