This is the next post in my discussion on injuries which result from dog bites in Peoria and other parts of Illinois. My last article discussed how insurance coverage may apply to dog bite cases. It is important to understand that such injuries are often covered by a homeowner’s insurance or renter’s insurance policy. Depending on where the bite occurred, the policies of other parties (such as the owner of an apartment complex) may be implicated. An attorney experienced in handling such matters can help to ensure that all relevant carriers are notified. In this article I will be explaining the difference that the doctrine of strict liability makes in such cases. If you require assistance then contact my office today to speak with a personal injury lawyer.
I discussed earlier in this series that strict liability applies in Illinois dog bite cases. This means that an owner can be liable for the acts of their animal regardless of steps which they take to prevent such an incident. In other words, whether or not the owner was actually negligent will not be relevant to the issue of liability. A dog bite victim will be able to recover damages against the owner, as long as the victim was lawfully in the place where the bite occurred and they did not provoke the animal. This rule of strict liability will apply whether the bite occurred in a residential setting or in a public area, such as a park.
The rule of strict liability is a departure from the negligence standard typically used in personal injury law. If a negligence standard applied to such cases then the owner of a dog would be able to escape liability as long as they took reasonable steps to ensure that the animal would not harm anyone. Consider the following example; a dog is allowed to run freely around a yard which is fenced in. Two children are walking down the sidewalk and the dog jumps the fence and attacks them. If a jury were to find that the fence was high enough for the owner to reasonably believe that it would contain the dog, then the owner would escape liability. Because Illinois applies strict liability to such cases, however, the owner would likely be liable.
It is important to note that the doctrine of strict liability would not apply to third-parties who share potential fault. Consider the following example. A condominium homeowner’s association is aware that one of the condo owners regularly allows his dog to run through the common areas without a leash. The HOA never sends a notice or warning to the homeowner, asking that they keep the dog restrained. The dog bites someone while off the leash. While the traditional negligence standard, and not strict liability, would apply to the HOA, the homeowner’s association would likely be liable under these facts. It must be remembered, however, that how the Court will rule in any given situation will always depend on the facts of the case.
If you or a family member have been injured then contact my office today to speak with a Peoria dog bite lawyer. I devote my practice to protecting the rights of those who have been injured and we will give your case the attention it deserves. This includes staying in regular contact with you and keeping you up to date as to the status of your matter. Contact us online or by telephone to schedule an initial consultation. My office also serves the Illinois cities of Bloomington, Eureka, Galesburg, Morton, Normal, Pekin, Springfield, and Washington.
