What does it mean when a plaintiff argues negligence per se in a dog attack suit?

If your dog has attacked or hurt another person, you may be charged and be held liable for your dog’s attack. The plaintiff in your case may argue negligence per se, which essentially means that you are bound by the consequences of breaking a law which was designed to prevent harm to others. If you have violated a statute or ordinance by failing to behave in accordance with the expectations of your community, and this violation resulted in harm to another, then the doctrine of negligence per se holds you fully liable.

Leash Law

Most jurisdictions require that your dog shall be controlled by you, be on a leash, and that you must prevent the dog from being “at large” in the community. Most leash laws require that your dog be on a leash when he is off your property. In some cases the length of the leash is specified, and some jurisdictions go even further and state that there must be a person at the other end of the leash, most particularly someone who is of sufficient age and fully capable of controlling the dog.

Hiring an Attorney

If your dog hurt another person and you are being sued, you should hire an attorney immediately, who can argue the negligence per se issue in your favor. The biggest dog attack liability issue in a negligence per se case is whether or not the violation of your dog showed a particular state of mind on your part. In other words, if the law states your dog may not be permitted to run at large, then if the dog dug out of your yard, did you, in fact “permit” him to run at large? Most courts will hold that there is no violation if the plaintiff cannot show proof of intent—that you willfully and negligently let your dog run loose, knowing full well he could hurt someone. A really good animal control law should focus more on the dog and less on the owner’s intent, but this is rare at this point, so having a lawyer present your case makes it much more likely you will prevail.