Dog Bite Injury Lawyer

In most cases, yes. Under Florida Statutes § 767.04, Florida follows a “strict liability” standard. This means an owner is strictly liable for dog-bite injuries caused by a bite, regardless of whether the dog has a history of aggression or the owner knew the dog was dangerous.

To establish liability, the victim must simply show the bite occurred in a public place or while they were lawfully on private property, including the dog owner’s property.

What Does “Lawfully on Private Property” Mean?

For dog bites occurring on the owner’s property, F.S. § 767.04 explains that a person is “lawfully” there when they are:

• On the property performing a duty imposed by law (including duties imposed by U.S. postal regulations) or

• On the property by the owner’s express or implied invitation.

Additionally, F.S. § 767.04 also covers bites that occur on other private property (not just the dog owner’s property) so long as the person bitten was lawfully there (for example, a guest who is not trespassing).

Are There Defenses for the Dog Owner?

Yes. Florida law provides two primary ways an owner’s liability may be reduced or eliminated: 

The “Bad Dog” sign defense: Under F.S. § 767.04, a dog owner is generally not liable for a bite that occurs on the owner’s premises if, at the time of the incident, the owner had posted “in a prominent place on his or her premises a sign easily readable” that included the words “Bad Dog.”

However, F.S. § 767.04 makes it clear that the sign defense does not apply:

• To a person under the age of 6, or

• If the injury was proximately caused (a legal standard requiring that the injury was a reasonably foreseeable consequence of a specific act or omission, rather than a remote or accidental coincidence) by a negligent act or omission of the owner. That is, the owner can still be held liable under common law negligence principles.   

In addition to these statutory defenses, the legal classification of the animal can impact the case. Under Florida law, a dangerous dog is specifically defined as one that has aggressively bitten, attacked, or caused serious injuries, such as broken bones or disfiguring lacerations, to a human being.

Comparative negligence: Florida applies negligence fault to dog bite cases.

• If the bitten person’s negligence was a proximate cause of the incident, the owner’s liability is reduced by the percentage of the bitten person’s negligence. F.S. § 767.04.

• Under Florida’s comparative negligence statute, F.S. § 768.81 (which defines “negligence action” to include actions based on strict liability), a claimant who is found to be more than 50% at fault for their own harm (such as provocation) is completely barred from recovering any damages. 

Can a Dog Sitter or “Keeper” Be Held Liable as an Owner?

Strict liability under F.S. § 767.04 applies specifically to the legal owner of the dog. Florida courts have noted that the statute is silent regarding “keepers” or “custodians.”

While a non-owner (like a dog walker or kennel) may not be strictly liable under the statute, they may still be held liable under negligence principles if they failed to use reasonable care in controlling the dog or knew of its dangerous tendencies.

Can a Landlord Be Held Liable If a Tenant’s Dog Bites Someone?

A landlord is not automatically liable for a tenant’s dog. But a landlord may be liable under negligence principles in certain situations, commonly where the landlord knew or should have known the dog was dangerous and had the ability to control the dog’s presence on the property (for example, through lease enforcement or removal authority) but failed to act reasonably.

How Long Do You Have to File a Claim? (Statutes of Limitations)

Filing deadlines are important factors in every dog-bite case. In Florida, the deadline is not always the same for every claim because it can change depending on the legal theory you use and the type of harm involved. Missing the applicable statute of limitations can permanently bar recovery, even if you have a strong case.

Which Deadline Applies?

Strict-Liability Dog-Bite Claims (Statutory Liability): 4 Years

Florida’s dog-bite statute creates a statutory basis for liability, and actions founded on a statutory liability generally must be filed within 4 years of the incident. F.S. § 95.11(3)(e). 

Negligence Claims: 2 Years

Some dog-bite cases involve negligence claims, often when the potential defendant is not the dog’s owner or when the facts support a negligence-based theory in addition to statutory liability. Actions founded on negligence generally must be filed within 2 years of the incident. F.S. § 95.11(5)(a).

Wrongful Death: 2 Years

If a dog attack results in death, Florida’s wrongful death statute of limitations generally applies. Wrongful death actions must be filed within 2 years of the date of death, not the date of the bite or when the injury occurred. F.S. § 95.11(5)(e).

Practical Example: A dog bite on January 1, 2026, may give a victim up to 4 years to file a strict-liability statutory claim, but only 2 years to file a negligence claim against a different defendant arising out of the same incident. If the attack results in death at a later date, the wrongful death deadline is generally 2 years from the date of death.

Why This Matters

Because a single incident can involve multiple potential defendants and different legal theories, the safest approach is to treat the shortest plausible deadline (2 years) as the applicable filing deadline until a dog bite attorney reviews your specific facts.

Identifying the correct “owner” versus “keeper” of a dog can take time, and evidence (such as surveillance footage or witness memory) can disappear or fade long before the legal filing deadline expires.

Yes. A child who is bitten by a dog can have a personal injury claim in Florida, and that claim can be pursued even if the dog has never bitten before and the owner had no prior warning signs.

Florida’s dog-bite statute generally makes the dog’s owner strictly liable for damages when the bite happens in a public place or when the child is lawfully on private property.

What’s different in a child’s case is usually who brings the claim and how certain defenses apply.

After a dog bite, it is important for parents to file a dog bite report with local authorities and document the incident as soon as possible. Because animal bites can lead to serious infections or long-term complications, parents should immediately seek medical attention for their child.

Prompt medical treatment not only protects the child’s health but also creates medical records that may support a legal claim. In cases involving a vicious dog, additional legal consequences may apply to the dog’s owner.

When a child is injured, families may be able to pursue compensation for medical expenses(e.g rabies shots), future care, pain and suffering, and other damages related to the attack.

The Main Liability Rule and Why It Often Favors the Child

Florida Statutes § 767.04 is the starting point. It provides that the owner of any dog that bites a person in a public place, or lawfully on private property (including the dog owner’s property), is liable for the damages caused by the bite regardless of the dog’s prior history and the owner’s knowledge of it. Generally, you must show:

• A bite occurred (the statute is bite-focused). 

• The defendant is the dog’s owner. 

• The child was either in a public place or lawfully on private property.

Florida law defines “lawfully on private property” to include being there to perform a legal duty (for example, certain official duties) or being there by the owner’s express or implied invitation. 

Practical example: If a child is bitten while playing at a neighbor’s home with permission, the child is typically “lawfully” on the property, and the owner’s lack of prior knowledge about aggression generally does not defeat liability under § 767.04. 

The “Bad Dog” Sign Defense and the Special Protection for Young Children

Florida’s dog-bite statute includes a narrow defense tied to a specific warning sign. If the bite occurs on the owner’s premises and the owner had a sign in a prominent place that is easily readable and includes the words “Bad Dog,” the owner is generally not liable. 

But the statute expressly limits that defense in two key ways:

• It does not apply to a child under age 6. 

• It does not apply if the damages were proximately caused (a legal standard requiring that the injury was a reasonably foreseeable consequence of a specific act or omission, rather than a remote or accidental coincidence) by the owner’s negligent act or omission. That is, the owner can still be held liable under common law negligence principles.   

Therefore, if the injured child is under 6, the “Bad Dog” sign is not a bar to liability under F.S. § 767.04. 

Who Actually Files the Claim or Lawsuit for a Child?

• Insurance claim (pre-suit): A parent or guardian typically presents the claim on the child’s behalf, communicates with insurers, and gathers documentation (medical records, photos, witness info).

• Lawsuit filed in court: A child generally cannot prosecute a lawsuit alone. Florida’s civil procedure rules require a minor to appear through an appropriate representative (such as a guardian, “next friend,” or guardian ad litem). 

What Damages Can Be Recovered in a Child Dog-Bite Case?

Damages depend on the specific facts and the evidence in each case. In Florida, a dog-bite claim can seek the “damages suffered” from the incident, and the categories of damages a jury may consider are reflected in Florida’s civil jury instructions for personal injury cases.

Damages commonly pursued for the child: In a child-injury case, the child is the legal “owner” of certain categories of harm, such as:

• Pain and suffering-type harms, including (as applicable) pain and suffering, mental anguish, disfigurement/scarring, disability or physical impairment, inconvenience, and loss of the ability to enjoy life.

• Medical-related losses for the future, specifically the reasonable expense of medical and related care and treatment that is reasonably expected to be obtained by the child after they reach the age of majority (18).

• Income-related losses, where supported by proof, such as loss of the ability to earn money in the future after the child reaches legal age (this is highly fact-dependent in a child case, but it is a recognized damages concept in Florida’s personal injury framework).

Damages that may be pursued by the parents (in addition to the child’s claim): Florida’s civil jury instructions recognize that, because parents are legally responsible for their minor child’s expenses and care, they have their own recoverable damages. These commonly include:

• The child’s medical expenses (past and future minority): The reasonable expense of medical care necessarily or reasonably obtained for the child in the past, as well as care to be obtained in the future until the child reaches legal age.

• Loss of the child’s services: The loss of the child’s services, earnings, or earning capacity during the child’s minority (until the child reaches age 18).

• Filial Consortium: In cases involving significant injury resulting in the child’s permanent total disability, parents may also pursue a claim for the loss of the child’s companionship, society, love, and affection.

Why pleading and allocation (the legal process of assigning specific portions of a settlement to the correct person and category of damage, such as separating the child’s pain and suffering from the parents’ medical expenses) matter: It’s important to avoid overlap (double recovery) and to assign losses to the proper claimant(s).

For example, because the right to recover past medical expenses belongs to the parents, a child’s individual claim, if filed without the parents as co-plaintiffs, might technically fail to capture those costs.

Florida’s jury-instruction structure underscores this by separately addressing (1) the injured child’s damages and (2) a parent’s damages arising from the injury. This is why a child dog-bite case must be structured carefully from the very beginning. 

The distinction between a parent’s claims and a child’s claims is a highly technical area of Florida law where a single procedural error can permanently bar the recovery of significant damages, such as past medical bills.

Because these “allocation” rules involve a complex intersection of the Florida Rules of Civil Procedure, Standard Jury Instructions, and evolving case law, it is critical that you consult with an experienced personal injury attorney.

Structuring the case correctly from day one is the only way to ensure every category of loss is protected and that the settlement process meets strict court requirements for minors.

How Long Do You Have to File a Claim? (Statutes of Limitations)

Filing deadlines are important factors in every dog-bite case. In Florida, the deadline is not always the same for every claim because it can change depending on the legal theory you use and the type of harm involved. Missing the applicable statute of limitations can permanently bar recovery, even if you have a strong case.

Which Deadline Applies?

Strict-Liability Dog-Bite Claims (Statutory Liability): 4 Years

Florida’s dog-bite statute creates a statutory basis for liability, and actions founded on a statutory liability generally must be filed within 4 years of the incident. F.S. § 95.11(3)(e). 

Negligence Claims: 2 Years

Some dog-bite cases involve negligence claims, often when the potential defendant is not the dog’s owner or when the facts support a negligence-based theory in addition to statutory liability. Actions founded on negligence generally must be filed within 2 years of the incident. F.S. § 95.11(5)(a).

Wrongful Death: 2 Years

If a dog attack results in death, Florida’s wrongful death statute of limitations generally applies. Wrongful death actions must be filed within 2 years of the date of death, not the date of the bite or when the injury occurred. F.S. § 95.11(5)(e).

Practical Example: A dog bite on January 1, 2026, may give a victim up to 4 years to file a strict-liability statutory claim but only 2 years to file a negligence claim against a different defendant arising out of the same incident. If the attack results in death at a later date, the wrongful death deadline is generally 2 years from the date of death.

Why This Matters

Because a single incident can involve multiple potential defendants and different legal theories, the safest approach is to treat the shortest plausible deadline (2 years) as the applicable filing deadline until an attorney reviews your specific facts.

Identifying the correct “owner” versus “keeper” of a dog can take time, and evidence (such as surveillance footage or witness memory) can disappear or fade long before the legal filing deadline expires.

No. Florida is not a “one free bite” state for dog-bite claims against a dog’s owner.

Florida has a strict-liability dog-bite statute, meaning an owner can be liable even if the dog has never bitten before and the owner had no reason to believe the dog was dangerous.

The statute says the owner is liable for damages suffered by a person bitten “regardless of the former viciousness of the dog or the owners’ knowledge of such viciousness.” Florida Statutes § 767.04. 

Section 767.04 imposes strict liability on the dog owner when the bite occurs in a public place or when the person is lawfully on private property. 

What You Must Prove Under Florida’s Dog-Bite Statute

A dog-bite claim under F.S. § 767.04 usually focuses on a short list of facts:

• The defendant is the dog’s owner: The strict-liability statute covers dog owners. 

• The dog bit someone: This statute is specifically about bites. 

• Location and lawful presence: the bite happened while the person was located in a public place or lawfully on private property, including the dog owner’s property.

What “lawfully on private property” means: The statute itself explains that a person is lawfully on private property when they are there:

• to perform a duty imposed by law (including duties under U.S. postal regulations), or

• by an invitation (express or implied) of the owner. 

Practical Example: A child invited to a neighbor’s backyard for a birthday party is typically “lawfully” on the property by invitation. If the neighbor’s dog bites the child, the owner does not get a “first bite” pass under Florida’s statute. 

What Does “One Free Bite” Mean and When Can It Still Matter?

The “one free bite” principle comes from common-law negligence in some jurisdictions, where a victim had to show the owner knew (or should have known) the dog was dangerous before the dog’s owner could be held liable for damages caused by the bite. Florida’s dog-bite statute removes that requirement for claims against the owner. 

Nevertheless, the “knowledge of danger” principle can still be relevant in Florida in cases that are not a straightforward owner or bite claim under F.S. § 767.04, for example:

• Claims against non-owners (like a business, a caretaker, or another party who is not the dog’s owner) are often based on common-law negligence principles rather than the strict-liability bite statute. Florida courts have stated that relevant statutes are “silent” as to keepers and custodians, which provides an opening for negligence claims against non-owners in appropriate cases. 

• Non-bite injuries caused by a dog (for example, a dog knocks someone down without biting) may involve different legal theories, including Florida’s broader dog-injury statute, F.S. § 767.01, or negligence, depending on the facts of the case. 

Practical Example: A dog is being handled by a non-owner at a business and bites a customer. The owner may be strictly liable under § 767.04, but the business may face a separate negligence claim based on its own conduct and control of the premises. 

What Can Reduce or Potentially Eliminate an Owner’s Liability

Strict liability does not mean automatic full recovery in every case. Florida’s statute includes specific defenses that are available to the owner.

Victim’s negligence can reduce or completely bar damages: If the bitten person’s own negligence was a proximate cause (a legal standard requiring that the injury was a reasonably foreseeable consequence of a specific act or omission, rather than a remote or accidental coincidence) of the bite, the statute reduces the owner’s liability by the percentage of that negligence. 

Importantly, under Florida’s modified comparative negligence system, if a person is determined to be more than 50% at fault for their own injuries, they are generally barred from recovering any damages at all. F.S. § 768.81(6).

For example, a jury might conclude that a bite victim ignored clear warnings and behaved in a way that contributed significantly to the incident and thus assign 51% of the fault for the injury to the bite dog bite victims, which would result in a complete bar to any recovery.

The “Bad Dog” sign exception (on the owner’s premises only): Under the dog-bite statute, F.S. § 767.04, an owner is not liable for a bite on the owner’s premises if the owner had a prominently displayed, easily readable sign including the words “Bad Dog,” except:

• as to a person under age 6 or

• if the damages were proximately caused (a legal standard requiring that the injury was a reasonably foreseeable consequence of a specific act or omission, rather than a remote or accidental coincidence) by a negligent act or omission of the owner, i.e., not basing the claim on the strict liability imposed by the statute but rather on general negligence principles. The dog-bite statute expressly states: “The remedy provided by this section is in addition to and cumulative with any other remedy provided by statute or common law.” F.S. § 767.04.  

Unlawful Presence – Trespassing

Because F.S. § 767.04 applies only when the person is in a public place or lawfully on private property, a person who is trespassing at the time of the bite generally cannot use the strict-liability statute to recover damages.

However, “unlawful presence” is a fact-specific determination. Even if the strict-liability statute does not apply, other legal theories, such as common law negligence, may still be available depending on the circumstances, such as whether the owner was aware of the person’s presence or if the victim was a child.

How Long Do You Have to File a Claim? (Statutes of Limitations)

Filing deadlines are important factors in every dog-bite case. In Florida, the deadline is not always the same for every claim because it can change depending on the legal theory you use and the type of harm involved. Missing the applicable statute of limitations can permanently bar recovery, even if you have a strong case.

Which Deadline Applies?

Strict-Liability Dog-Bite Claims (Statutory Liability): 4 Years

Florida’s dog-bite statute creates a statutory basis for liability, and actions founded on a statutory liability generally must be filed within 4 years of the incident. F.S. § 95.11(3)(e). 

Negligence Claims: 2 Years

Some dog-bite cases involve negligence claims, often when the potential defendant is not the dog’s owner or when the facts support a negligence-based theory in addition to statutory liability. Actions founded on negligence generally must be filed within 2 years of the incident. F.S. § 95.11(5)(a).

Wrongful Death: 2 Years

If a dog attack results in death, Florida’s wrongful death statute of limitations generally applies. Wrongful death actions must be filed within 2 years of the date of death, not the date of the bite or when the injury occurred. F.S. § 95.11(5)(e).

Practical Example: A dog bite on January 1, 2026, may give a victim up to 4 years to file a strict-liability statutory claim, but only 2 years to file a negligence claim against a different defendant arising out of the same incident. If the attack results in death at a later date, the wrongful death deadline is generally 2 years from the date of death.

Why This Matters

Because a single incident can involve multiple potential defendants and different legal theories, the safest approach is to treat the shortest plausible deadline (2 years) as the applicable filing deadline until an attorney reviews your specific facts.

Identifying the correct “owner” versus “keeper” of a dog can take time, and evidence (such as surveillance footage or witness memory) can disappear or fade long before the legal filing deadline expires.