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