Lexington, AL - A 6-year-old boy was taken to the hospital Friday morning after he was bitten in the face by a dog. According to the County Sheriffs office, the young boy was petting the dog in his yard. The dog did not belong to the little boy.
Incidents involving animal bites, and the legal cases that usually follow, are on the rise in the U.S., mainly due to increased ownership of pets. This is particularly true of dogs; some states are even contemplating or have already passed breed-specific prohibitions such as bans on the ownership of pit bulls.
Intentional Use of Animals to Bite and Injure
One who uses an animal to bite, attack, or otherwise injure another person may be liable for damages in an assault and battery action if the elements of those torts can be established. Liability therefore is not premised upon an owner's or keeper's responsibility for acts and damage by his animals, but upon his own intentional wrongdoing through the use of an instrumentality or weapon. Hence, issues regarding the animal's viciousness or dangerous propensities, and the owner or keeper's knowledge of them are irrelevant. In some circumstances, the intentional use of an animal to injure may be justified, such as in defense of property or in self-defense, but not if it constitutes the use of excessive force under the circumstances.
Trespassing Animals that Bite or Cause Injuries
As society developed the common-law rule of strict liability for animal trespass evolved. That rule was that the owner of animals of a kind likely to roam and do damage or bite is strictly liable for damages in a trespass action, quare clausum freigit (''wherefore he broke the close''). The rule was directed primarily toward animals with a natural propensity to roam and do serious damage to crops and property; consequently, dogs and cats were usually excluded from its coverage.