Dog Bite Laws by State: Strict Liability, One-Bite Rule and Deadlines

Dog bite law in the United States is state law, and it comes in three forms. 22 jurisdictions have a statute that makes the owner liable for a bite without proof that they knew the dog was dangerous, 16 have a statute that does so only in limited situations, and 13 have no such statute, so the victim must prove the owner knew of the danger or was negligent. The table below gives every state’s rule, statute and filing deadline, from state files reviewed in October 2026.

The rule is only half the answer. Each state also has a shared-fault rule that can reduce or bar an award, and a deadline that ends the claim. Both are covered below, with links to every state page.

The three kinds of dog bite law

Strict liability by statute. The legislature has made the owner liable for the injury itself. California’s Civil Code § 3342 makes the owner liable when a dog bites someone in a public place or lawfully on private property, including the owner’s, whatever the dog’s past behavior or the owner’s knowledge ¹. Ohio’s statute is broader: the owner, keeper or harborer is liable for any injury, death or loss the dog causes, not only bites ².

Strict does not mean automatic. The statutes carry defenses, most often provocation, trespass or a crime by the victim. Ohio’s does not protect a person committing criminal trespass on the owner’s property or teasing the dog ². Florida’s § 767.04 lets an owner who posted a readable “Bad Dog” sign escape the statutory claim, except when the victim is under 6 or the owner’s own negligence caused the bite ⁴. Of the statutes, 10 cover bites only, so a knock-down or a scratch has to be pursued another way. The strict liability guide lists each statute’s reach.

Partial strict liability. These states have a dog bite statute, but it removes the proof of knowledge only for some injuries or some places. Pennsylvania’s Dog Law makes the owner or keeper pay the victim’s medical costs in full, but lost wages and pain and suffering still need proof of negligence or knowledge ⁵. Maryland presumes the owner knew of the dog’s dangerous propensities, a presumption the owner can rebut, and imposes no-fault liability only when the dog was running at large ⁶.

Other partial statutes turn on a local ordinance, a court order or a city line. In Georgia, a violation of a local leash law stands in for proof that the dog was vicious ⁷. New York’s statute reaches only the medical costs caused by a dog a judge has already found dangerous ⁸. Montana’s applies only within incorporated cities and towns ⁹. See the pages for Pennsylvania, Maryland, Georgia, New York and Montana.

The one-bite rule and negligence. Where no statute applies, the common law does. The owner is liable if they knew or should have known the dog had a dangerous propensity and it caused the harm. In Texas, Marshall v. Ranne (1974) requires proof that the dog had dangerous propensities abnormal to its class and that the owner knew or should have known of them ¹⁰. Ordinary negligence, such as letting a dog roam against a leash ordinance, is a second route in most of these states.

“One bite” is a nickname, not a free pass. An earlier bite is the clearest proof of knowledge, but growling, lunging or a warning from a neighbor can count. Hawaii shows the range: its statute, HRS § 663-9, removes the need to prove knowledge, but courts still require proof that the owner was negligent, so the site classes it with the one-bite states ^{11 12}. Vermont’s Supreme Court rejected strict liability in Martin v. Christman (2014) and left any change to the legislature ¹³. The one-bite rule guide explains how knowledge is proved.

Dog bite laws in all 50 states and D.C.

The table shows each jurisdiction’s rule, the statute that creates it (or “None” for one-bite states), and the general deadline to sue for a bite. Click a state for its defenses, damages, landlord rule and sources.

The deadline column gives the period most bite claims use, not every period that can apply. Arizona’s one year is the clearest example: the Court of Appeals held in Murdock v. Balle that a claim under the dog bite statute is a liability created by statute with a one-year limit, while a negligence claim has two years ¹⁴. Across the country, 23 jurisdictions use two years and 19 use three. Children usually get more time; the dog bite statute of limitations guide has every state’s rule for minors and for claims against a city or county.

Shared fault: the second rule that decides a claim

Every state also decides what happens when the injured person was partly at fault, for example by reaching over a fence or ignoring a warning. 10 jurisdictions use pure comparative fault, which reduces the award by the victim’s share but never bars it. 10 bar recovery when the victim is 50 percent or more at fault, and 24 at 51 percent or more.

5 jurisdictions keep contributory negligence, under which any fault that contributed to the injury can defeat a negligence claim. Maryland’s highest court kept that rule in Coleman v. Soccer Ass’n of Columbia (2013) and said any change belongs to the legislature ¹⁵. Two states fit none of these groups. In Michigan, fault never bars a claim, but a victim more at fault than everyone else loses noneconomic damages in a common-law case ¹⁶; under the dog bite statute, Hill v. Sacka held the victim’s negligence irrelevant unless it amounts to provocation ¹⁷. South Dakota lets a victim recover only if their negligence was “slight” compared with the owner’s ¹⁸.

A strict-liability statute does not always use the general fault rule. Michigan is one example ¹⁷; Florida’s § 767.04 has its own fault clause, discussed below ⁴. The state pages say how each statute and fault rule fit together.

How to read your state’s row

1. Start with the rule. “Strict liability” means the statute removes the need to prove knowledge. “Partial” means it does so only for some injuries, places or damages. “One-bite rule” means proof of knowledge or negligence is required.
2. Check what the statute covers. Some statutes cover bites only, some any injury; some protect only people in public or lawfully on private property. The state page lists the words that matter.
3. Check the defenses. Provocation, trespass and a crime by the victim are the usual ones, and a few states add their own, such as Florida’s sign rule ⁴.
4. Find the fault rule. The fault table shows whether your share of blame reduces the award or can end the claim.
5. Note the deadline. The table gives the general period. Claims against a government body often need a written notice within months, and a child’s claim usually runs longer.
6. Run the checker. The dog bite claim checker applies the same state data to where and how the bite happened.

What changed from 2023 to 2026

Several states changed their rules in the last four years, and many summaries online have not caught up. Each change below comes from the state’s own statute, session law or court decision.

New York (2025): negligence claims are back. On April 17, 2025, the Court of Appeals in Flanders v. Goodfellow overruled Bard v. Jahnke “to the extent that it bars negligence liability for harm caused by domestic animals” ¹⁹. A bitten person in New York can now prove the owner failed to use due care, not only that the owner knew of vicious propensities.

Florida (2023 and 2025): shorter deadline, a fault bar and dangerous-dog rules. HB 837, effective March 24, 2023, cut the deadline for negligence actions from four years to two for claims arising after that date ²⁰. It also added § 768.81(6), which bars a plaintiff more than 50 percent at fault in a negligence action, a term the statute defines to include strict liability ²¹. Whether that bar overrides § 767.04’s own clause, which reduces the award by the victim’s share with no cut-off, had not been decided on appeal by October 2026 ⁴. The 2025 Pam Rock Act rewrote Florida’s dangerous-dog law, including a $100,000 insurance requirement for dangerous dogs from July 1, 2025 ²⁹.

Louisiana (2024 and 2025): two years, and a 51 percent bar. Act 423 of 2024 replaced the one-year period with two years for injuries after July 1, 2024 ²². Act 15 of 2025 ended pure comparative fault: from January 1, 2026, a victim found 51 percent or more at fault recovers nothing ²³. See Louisiana.

Utah (2025): a trespasser exception. S.B. 101, effective May 7, 2025, added an exception for a criminal trespasser injured on the owner’s land while the dog is fenced in ²⁴. See Utah.

Smaller statute changes. Connecticut confirmed in 2024 that the owner, the keeper “or both” are liable ²⁵. Arizona’s 2025 amendment requires the owner to give the person bitten the owner’s contact information ²⁶. Montana’s 2025 rewrite added bites to service animals but kept the city-limits condition ⁹. New Mexico’s Supreme Court re-approved its dog-owner jury instruction in October 2025, for cases pending or filed on or after December 31, 2025 ²⁷.

Owner’s side. Ohio’s Avery’s Law (H.B. 247) took effect on March 20, 2026 and replaced the state’s dangerous-dog chapter; the Legislative Service Commission described the old system as “one free bite” ²⁸. See Ohio’s dangerous dog law and the dangerous dog laws guide.

Bills that did not pass. Vermont’s H.183, which would have created strict liability for dog injuries, was referred to committee on February 11, 2025 and went no further before the 2025–2026 session ended ³⁰. Vermont remains a negligence state.

Where to go from here

The rule in your state shapes what has to be proved, but the injury, the evidence and the insurance usually decide the outcome. What to do after a dog bite covers the first days, dog bite settlements explains what insurer data shows about claim values, and my dog bit someone covers the owner’s side. For a child’s injury, see when a dog bites a child. This site is a legal reference, not a law firm; for advice on a specific claim, talk to a lawyer licensed in the state where the bite happened.

Questions

Which states are strict liability for dog bites?

Every state marked "Strict liability" in the table above has a statute that makes the owner liable without proof that they knew the dog was dangerous, such as California Civil Code § 3342 and Ohio Revised Code § 955.28¹². The guide to strict liability dog bite states lists each statute with what it covers and where it applies.

Is a dog owner liable if the dog had never bitten anyone before?

In a strict-liability state, yes, unless a defense applies: Arizona's statute applies "regardless of the former viciousness of the dog or the owner's knowledge of its viciousness"³. In a one-bite state such as Texas, the victim must show the owner knew or should have known of the dog's dangerous propensities, or prove ordinary negligence¹⁰.

Does breaking a leash law make the owner liable for a bite?

It depends on the state. In Georgia, proof that a local ordinance required the dog to be leashed or at heel and it was not stands in for proof that the dog was vicious⁷. In most other states a leash-law violation is evidence of negligence rather than automatic liability, and Maryland makes the owner liable without fault for injuries caused by a dog running at large⁶.

Can I sue someone other than the owner, such as a dog sitter or landlord?

Often, but under different rules. Connecticut's statute reaches the owner, the keeper "or both"²⁵, while most statutes name only the owner, so claims against landlords and other non-owners usually run on negligence and the defendant's knowledge of the danger. See landlord liability for a tenant's dog.

Sources

1. California Civil Code § 3342, California Legislative Information. Checked 17 October 2026.
2. Ohio Revised Code § 955.28, Ohio Legislative Service Commission. Checked 17 October 2026.
3. A.R.S. § 11-1025, Liability for dog bites, Arizona State Legislature. Checked 17 October 2026.
4. Florida Statutes § 767.04, Dog owner's liability for damages to persons bitten, The Florida Legislature. Checked 17 October 2026.
5. Dog Law, Act of Dec. 7, 1982, P.L. 784, No. 225 (3 P.S. § 459-101 et seq.), §§ 102, 305, 502, 502-A to 507-A, as amended through Act 47 of 2024, Pennsylvania General Assembly. Checked 17 October 2026.
6. Md. Code, Courts and Judicial Proceedings § 3-1901, Maryland General Assembly. Checked 17 October 2026.
7. O.C.G.A. § 51-2-7 (liability of owner or keeper of vicious or dangerous animal), Justia (Official Code of Georgia Annotated). Checked 17 October 2026.
8. N.Y. Agriculture and Markets Law § 123 (Dangerous dogs), New York State Senate. Checked 17 October 2026.
9. Mont. Code Ann. § 27-1-715, Liability of owner of vicious dog, Montana Legislature (MCA 2025). Checked 17 October 2026.
10. Marshall v. Ranne, 511 S.W.2d 255 (Tex. 1974), CourtListener (Supreme Court of Texas opinion). Checked 17 October 2026.
11. Hawaii Revised Statutes § 663-9 (Liability of owner or harborer of animal), Hawaii State Legislature. Checked 17 October 2026.
12. Franks v. Holloway, 153 Haw. 419, 540 P.3d 960 (App. 2023), CourtListener (Free Law Project). Checked 17 October 2026.
13. Martin v. Christman, 2014 VT 55, Vermont Supreme Court. Checked 17 October 2026.
14. Murdock v. Balle, 144 Ariz. 136, 696 P.2d 230 (App. 1985), CourtListener (Free Law Project). Checked 17 October 2026.
15. Coleman v. Soccer Ass'n of Columbia, 432 Md. 679, 69 A.3d 1149 (2013), Maryland Judiciary. Checked 17 October 2026.
16. MCL 600.2959, Comparative fault; reduced damages, Michigan Legislature. Checked 17 October 2026.
17. Hill v. Sacka, 256 Mich. App. 443, 666 N.W.2d 282 (2003), CourtListener. Checked 17 October 2026.
18. SDCL 20-9-2 (comparative negligence), South Dakota Legislature. Checked 17 October 2026.
19. Flanders v Goodfellow, 44 NY3d 57, 2025 NY Slip Op 02261 (Apr. 17, 2025), New York State Law Reporting Bureau. Checked 17 October 2026.
20. CS/CS/HB 837 (2023), Civil Remedies, ch. 2023-15, Laws of Florida, The Florida Senate. Checked 17 October 2026.
21. Florida Statutes § 768.81, Comparative fault, The Florida Legislature. Checked 17 October 2026.
22. Act No. 423 (HB 315), 2024 Regular Session, enrolled, Louisiana State Legislature. Checked 17 October 2026.
23. Résumé digest, Act 15 (HB 431), 2025 Regular Session, Louisiana State Legislature. Checked 17 October 2026.
24. S.B. 101, Dog Related Liability Amendments (2025 General Session), enrolled copy, Utah Legislature. Checked 17 October 2026.
25. Connecticut General Statutes § 22-357, Damage by dogs to person or property (with official annotations), Connecticut General Assembly. Checked 17 October 2026.
26. Laws 2025, ch. 137 (SB 1241), animal bites; owner contact information, Arizona State Legislature. Checked 17 October 2026.
27. UJI 13-506 NMRA, Liability of a dog owner (as amended Oct. 31, 2025), New Mexico Supreme Court. Checked 17 October 2026.
28. Final Analysis, Am. Sub. H.B. 247 (136th General Assembly), Avery's Law, Ohio Legislative Service Commission. Checked 17 October 2026.
29. CS/HB 593 (2025), Dangerous Dogs (Pam Rock Act), ch. 2025-61, Laws of Florida, The Florida Senate. Checked 17 October 2026.
30. H.183 (2025–2026): An act relating to strict liability for damages caused by domestic dogs, Vermont General Assembly. Checked 17 October 2026.