Case Law Update

Florida Statutes in Chapter 767: “Damage by Dogs; Dangerous Dogs”

Florida Statute § 767.01 — “Dog owner’s liability for damages to persons, domestic animals, or livestock”

Florida Statute § 767.01 is a Florida law which applies to damage caused by a dog even if no biting occurs, as long as it results from canine characteristics like chasing, jumping, or aggressive behavior. It states:

• A dog owner is liable for any damage done by the owner’s dog to a person or to any animal included in the definitions of “domestic animal” and “livestock” as provided by s. 585.01.
• If a dog owner has knowledge of the dog’s dangerous propensities, the owner must securely confine the dog in a proper enclosure defined in s. 767.11.

Florida Statute § 767.04 — “Dog owner’s liability for damages to persons bitten”

Florida Statute § 767.04 is a Florida law which applies strict liability to a dog owner for injuries caused by a dog that bites a victim. It states:

“The owner of any dog that bites any person while such person is on or in a public place, or lawfully on or in a private place, including the property of the owner of the dog, is liable for damages suffered by persons bitten, regardless of the former viciousness of the dog or the owners’ knowledge of such viciousness. However, any negligence on the part of the person bitten that is a proximate cause of the biting incident reduces the liability of the owner of the dog by the percentage that the bitten person’s negligence contributed to the biting incident. A person is lawfully upon private property of such owner within the meaning of this act when the person is on such property in the performance of any duty imposed upon him or her by the laws of this state or by the laws or postal regulations of the United States, or when the person is on such property upon invitation, expressed or implied, of the owner.”

Defenses to Florida Statute § 767.04

After an amendment to statute § 767.04 in 1993, the legislature replaced the defense of provocation with comparative negligence, and permitted plaintiffs to seek other remedies outside chapter 767. Fla. Stat. § 767.04 states:

“However, the owner is not liable, except as to a person under the age of 6, or unless the damages are proximately caused by a negligent act or omission of the owner, if at the time of any such injury the owner had displayed in a prominent place on his or her premises a sign easily readable including the words ‘Bad Dog.’ The remedy provided by this section is in addition to and cumulative with any other remedy provided by statute or common law.”

Jones v. Utica Mutual Insurance Co., 463 So. 2d 1153 (Fla. 1985) — Holding

In 1985, the Florida Supreme Court applied strict liability to a dog owner for injuries caused by a dog that did not actually bite the victim. The Court held: “Section 767.01 is a strict liability statute which has consistently been construed to virtually make an owner the insurer of the dog’s conduct.” Jones v. Utica Mut. Ins. Co., 463 So. 2d 1153, 1156 (Fla. 1985) (citing Donner v. Arkwright-Boston Mfrs. Mut. Ins. Co., 358 So. 2d 21, 23 (Fla. 1978) (“[T]he Florida Legislature enacted statutes designed to obviate the element of scienter, and make the dog owner the insurer against damage done by his dog.”)). The only total defense to liability available in a section 767.01 action is for a dog owner to have “displayed in a prominent place on his or her premises a sign easily readable including the words ‘Bad Dog.’” § 767.04, Fla. Stat.

Fannin v. Hunter, 331 So. 3d 793 (Fla. 1st DCA 2021) — Holding

The Florida 1st DCA held that “[u]nder § 767.01, Fla. Stat. (2017), dog owners are strictly liable for any damage done by their dogs to a person. A plaintiff need only show the dog acted in an affirmative or aggressive manner.”

Practical Implications for Attorneys

For personal injury litigation in Florida, the statutes and cases address and apply strict liability to dog-related cases NOT involving dog bites, such as:

• A dog knocking someone down;
• A dog running into the street and causing a crash;
• A dog chasing and causing a fall.

This case law update is provided for informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice, nor does it create an attorney-client relationship. The application of the authorities discussed depends on the specific facts of each case. Attorneys at Shiner Law Group are Members of The Florida Bar. This is attorney advertising.