Dog Bites Burbank

Dog ownership is common throughout Burbank, from the residential streets of the Rancho District to public spaces like the Chandler Bikeway. While most interactions with dogs are safe, attacks do occur and can result in severe physical and psychological trauma. California law provides a specific framework for handling these incidents, distinct from many other types of personal injury cases.

Benji Personal Injury Accident Attorneys represents individuals in Burbank who have suffered injuries due to dog attacks. Understanding the specific statutes, including California Civil Code and Burbank Municipal Code, is essential for anyone seeking legal recourse in Los Angeles County.

California Strict Liability Laws

California operates under a strict liability standard regarding dog bites, codified in Civil Code § 3342. This statute establishes that a dog owner is liable for damages suffered by any person who is bitten by the dog while in a public place or lawfully in a private place. This liability applies regardless of the former viciousness of the dog or the owner's knowledge of such viciousness.

The concept of strict liability removes the requirement for the victim to prove the owner was negligent. Unlike in some other states, California does not observe a "one bite rule." An owner is responsible for the injuries caused by a bite even if the animal has never shown aggression previously.

Lawful presence on private property includes instances where the victim is on the property to perform a duty imposed by law, such as delivering mail, or upon the express or implied invitation of the owner.

Burbank Municipal Code and Animal Classifications

Local ordinances in Burbank provide additional context for how animal aggression is handled. The Burbank Municipal Code (Title 5, Chapter 1, Article 16) outlines procedures for classifying dogs as "Potentially Dangerous" or "Vicious." These classifications are made by Animal Control Services, a division of the Burbank Police Department, after an investigation and hearing process.

• Potentially Dangerous: A dog may receive this designation if it forces people to defend themselves from aggressive behavior while off the owner's property, or if it bites a person causing a less severe injury. Owners of such dogs may be required to maintain specific liability insurance, keep the dog securely confined, and post warning signs.
• Vicious: This designation applies to dogs that inflict severe injury or kill a human being, or dogs previously designated as potentially dangerous that repeat aggressive behaviors. A dog declared vicious may be subject to euthanasia if it poses a significant public threat. Owners of vicious dogs face strict confinement requirements and, in some cases, may be prohibited from owning animals for a period of time.

These administrative findings can serve as relevant evidence in civil proceedings, demonstrating a history of aggression or an owner's failure to adhere to safety requirements imposed by the city, thereby supporting a claim for negligence.

Liability for Non-Bite Injuries

Strict liability under Civil Code § 3342 applies specifically to bites. However, dogs can cause injury through other means, such as jumping on a person and knocking them down, scratching them, or causing a bicycle accident by chasing a rider. In these scenarios, the strict liability statute does not apply.

Victims injured by a dog without being bitten must pursue a claim based on negligence. To succeed, the injured party must demonstrate that the owner failed to use reasonable care to prevent the injury. This might involve proving the owner violated leash laws, failed to control a dog they knew was excitable or heavy enough to cause harm, or had prior knowledge (scienter) of the dog's non-bite aggressive tendencies.

Landlord and Property Owner Liability

While the dog owner is the primary party liable for an attack, landlords may share liability in specific circumstances. A landlord can be held responsible if they had actual knowledge of the dog's dangerous propensities and the ability to remove the danger but failed to do so. This "actual knowledge" often stems from prior complaints, previous incidents involving the dog on the property, or specific warnings about the animal's aggressive behavior.

Commercial property owners or residential landlords cannot be held liable based solely on the breed of the dog or speculation about its behavior. Evidence must show they knew the specific animal posed a threat to safety and had the opportunity and power to intervene.

Damages in Dog Bite Cases

Victims of dog attacks often face a wide range of costs and losses. Legal claims seek to restore the victim to their financial position prior to the incident and compensate for pain and suffering. The following table outlines common categories of damages available in these cases.

Common Defenses in Dog Bite Litigation

Defense attorneys and insurance carriers often utilize specific arguments to reduce or eliminate the dog owner's liability. Benji Personal Injury Accident Attorneys prepares cases to address these common defenses.

Provocation

If the victim provoked the dog, the owner may not be fully liable. Burbank local law, mirroring state law, notes that animals should not be declared dangerous if the victim was teasing, tormenting, abusing, or assaulting the animal. The definition of provocation, and whether the victim's actions directly led to the bite, is often a central issue in litigation.

Trespassing

Strict liability under Civil Code § 3342 protects those lawfully on private property. If a person was trespassing at the time of the bite, the owner might not be liable under this specific statute. This defense relies on proving the victim had no permission, implied or express, to be on the premises. However, a property owner still owes a duty of care to trespassers to avoid wanton or willful injury.

Assumption of Risk

This defense frequently applies to professionals who work with dogs, such as veterinarians, groomers, or kennel workers. The "Veterinarian's Rule" generally holds that these professionals assume the risk of being bitten as part of their occupation, though exceptions exist if the owner concealed a known danger, such as a dog's history of aggression that was not disclosed.

Statute of Limitations

The State of California imposes a strict deadline for filing personal injury lawsuits. For dog bite cases, the statute of limitations is generally two years from the date the injury occurred. Failure to file a lawsuit within this window typically results in the court dismissing the case and the loss of the right to seek compensation. Prompt legal action allows for the preservation of critical evidence, such as animal control records, medical documentation, and witness statements, which can be vital to substantiating a claim.

Legal Assistance for Burbank Residents

Navigating the aftermath of a dog attack involves dealing with insurance adjusters, accumulating medical bills, and understanding complex liability laws. Benji Personal Injury Accident Attorneys provides dedicated legal counsel to victims in Burbank and throughout Los Angeles County, helping them understand their rights under both California state law and local municipal codes. Establishing liability and documenting the full extent of injuries are critical steps in securing fair compensation.