Disponible las 24 horas del día, los 7 días de la semana
Disponible las 24 horas del día, los 7 días de la semana
Kentucky makes a dog’s owner pay for the harm the dog causes, whether or not the dog ever bit anyone before. KRS 258.235(4) says any owner whose dog is found to have caused damage to a person “shall be responsible for that damage,” and in 2018 the Supreme Court of Kentucky held that this is strict liability. Your own share of fault, if you had any, can lower the award without ending the claim. The catch is time: an adult has only one year to file suit.
This page covers the strict liability statute and the negligence claim that sits beside it, what you have to prove, Kentucky’s local leash rules, the very broad definition of owner, the defenses an insurer will raise, pure comparative fault, a child’s case, the 2017 change to landlord liability and the 2025 decision that followed it, deadlines including claims against a city or the state, injuries and compensation, the court process for declaring a dog vicious, bite reporting and rabies, settlement value, and insurance.
Dog Bite Laws handles dog attack cases. Talk to us for free, and pay no fee unless we recover money for you.
Kentucky has a dog bite statute, and it is short. KRS 258.235(4) reads: “Any owner whose dog is found to have caused damage to a person, livestock, or other property shall be responsible for that damage.”
For years Kentucky courts softened that language. In a 2007 case, the Court of Appeals approved a jury instruction that asked whether the owner had reason to believe the victim would be in the vicinity of the dog. In Maupin v. Tankersley, decided February 15, 2018, the Supreme Court of Kentucky rejected that kind of instruction. A woman walking back to a truck across part of a 42-acre tract was attacked by a pack of the landowner’s dogs. The jury found he owned the dogs but cleared him because he had no reason to believe she would be near them and had not failed to use ordinary care to control them. The court reversed, holding that “a dog owner is strictly liable for injuries caused when his dog attacks a person.” Once the jury finds the defendant owned the dog, liability is fixed.
So Kentucky is not a one bite rule state. You do not have to show the dog had bitten before, that the owner knew it was aggressive, or that the owner was careless.
The statute does not crowd out ordinary negligence. In 2025 the Supreme Court repeated that negligence and strict liability are “two separate and distinguishable legal concepts,” which matters when the person you need to reach, such as a landlord, is not a statutory owner.
The statute’s word is damage the dog “caused,” not only a bite. If a dog knocked you down, read about a dog attack without a bite.
The strict liability claim comes down to three things. The defendant was an owner of the dog as Kentucky defines that word, the dog caused your injury, and you suffered damages. Maupin gave the model instruction in nearly those terms: find for the plaintiff if the defendant “was the owner of the dogs that inflicted the injuries.” Prior bites, warnings, and how carefully the dog was kept are not elements.
Ownership is where the work is, because Kentucky’s definition reaches well past the person who bought the dog.
The negligence claim asks more. As the Supreme Court put it in 2025, you must prove the defendant’s actions, or inaction, fell below the applicable standard of care, leading to your injury. Against the dog’s own owner, the older common-law rule looked for proof that the owner or keeper knew of the dog’s vicious propensities. Against a landlord, older Kentucky decisions looked at what the landlord knew about the dog and what area the landlord controlled.
So build two files from the start. The first proves the strict liability claim: who owned, kept, or harbored the dog, your medical bills, and photographs of the wounds as they heal. The second covers the dog’s history: animal control complaints, any vicious dog order, prior bites. You need it for a negligence claim or punitive damages, and it gets harder to assemble every week.
Kentucky’s dog statutes, KRS chapter 258, contain no general leash requirement. What they do say is narrower:
The real leash rules are local, since chapter 258 leaves cities and counties free to pass dog ordinances that do not conflict with it.
For your claim, a leash violation is supporting proof, not the basis of liability. Kentucky’s negligence per se statute, KRS 446.070, lets a person injured by the violation of a statute recover, but the Supreme Court of Kentucky has said in T & M Jewelry v. Hicks (2006) that its “any statute” language is limited to Kentucky statutes and not federal statutes or local ordinances. So a city leash ordinance does not create negligence per se under that statute.
A citation still matters as a record. A dated animal control record showing the dog was loose answers the adjuster who later claims you walked into the dog’s yard.
Kentucky defines owner broadly. Under KRS 258.095(5), owner includes every person with a property right in the dog, and every person who:
More than one person can qualify for the same dog: the buyer, a person who owns or leases and lives in the home where the dog is allowed to stay, or a friend who has the dog in their care for the week. If you are unsure who had the dog, read what determines ownership of a dog.
The breadth also sets a trap. The Court of Appeals has held that if you were an owner of the dog under that definition when it bit you, you cannot use the statute against the dog’s legal owner. In Jordan v. Lusby (2002), a groomer bitten by a client’s Chow was held to be a statutory owner because she had accepted the dog into her care. In Horbach v. Forsythe (2023), as the Supreme Court described it in Deramos, a paid dog walker was bitten on the hand, and the Court of Appeals held she was a statutory owner because the dog was in her care, so she could not sue the owners under the statute.
That is not always the end. Horbach also said that “one who is not strictly liable is not necessarily exempt from negligence,” and the Supreme Court called that distinction significant in 2025. If you were pet sitting, dog walking, grooming, boarding, or working at a kennel or veterinary office, raise it on the first call so the right claim gets pleaded.
KRS 258.235(4) lists no defenses at all. The owner’s insurer will still argue provocation and trespass, through other doors.
Older cases from 1967 and 1970 let owners escape liability to an unexpected visitor where the dog was fenced or chained. Maupin distinguished them as resting on contributory negligence, which Kentucky abandoned in 1984.
One related rule protects you. KRS 258.235(1) says any person, without liability, may kill or seize a dog observed attacking any person. For more, see whether you can kill a dog that is attacking you.
Kentucky uses pure comparative fault. In Hilen v. Hays, decided July 5, 1984, the Supreme Court of Kentucky threw out the old rule that any fault by the victim barred recovery and chose the pure form, under which “the claimant’s recovery is reduced by the amount of fault attributable to him, but he may recover regardless of whether his fault is equal to or greater than” the defendant’s. The legislature then wrote apportionment into KRS 411.182, which applies to “all tort actions” and tells the jury to weigh both the nature of each party’s conduct and how much it caused the harm.
Maupin applied that rule to dog bites. It held that “a plaintiff’s comparative negligence in a dog bite case may be considered in measuring the damages awarded to her,” and said a comparative fault analysis of damages in these cases “is mandated by KRS 411.182(2).” The order matters: Maupin directs that the jury first decide whether the defendant owned the dog, which fixes liability, then be told of your duty to use ordinary care for your own safety, and then set damages and split them by fault.
Work the numbers. A victim found 20 percent at fault recovers 80 percent of the damages. A victim found 60 percent at fault still recovers 40 percent. There is no 50 or 51 percent line in Kentucky. Maupin also said comparative fault lets a jury award de minimis damages to a plaintiff who was the sole wrongdoer, so serious misconduct can shrink an award to almost nothing.
The fight in most Kentucky cases is over your percentage, not over whether the owner is liable, so what you say early about the bite carries weight. And if you settle with one responsible person, KRS 411.182(4) reduces your claim against the others by that person’s equitable share, so settle in the right order.
A child bitten in Kentucky has more time than an adult, but not much more. Under KRS 413.170(1), when the person entitled to sue was an infant when the claim arose, the action may be brought within the same number of years after the disability is removed. Kentucky’s age of majority is 18, and the injury deadline is one year, so a child’s own claim generally must be filed by the nineteenth birthday.
The parent’s claim is different. KRS 413.140(1)(a) gives one year for an action for injury to the person of the plaintiff’s child, and the tolling rule protects the child, not the parent. Treat any claim a parent holds for a child’s medical bills as running one year from the bite, and talk to a lawyer before that year is up.
Expect the owner’s insurer to point at your child’s behavior. Under Kentucky’s pure comparative fault, a child’s share of fault would reduce rather than bar the claim. In 1967 Kentucky’s highest court said a five-year-old, being under seven, could not be guilty of contributory negligence, and a separate opinion in Maupin noted that statement in 2018. How that age line applies under comparative fault is a question to put to your lawyer. For the arguments adjusters make, read whether a child can provoke a dog.
Facial scars are where children’s cases are won or lost, and under Section 54 of the Kentucky Constitution there is no cap on what a jury can award for them against a private owner. An offer that arrives before anyone knows how a scar will mature deserves suspicion. If a child dies from an attack, KRS 411.135 lets the parents recover for the loss of the child’s affection and companionship during minority.
Kentucky’s landlord law has moved three times, starting in 2012, and much published material is out of date.
2012. In Benningfield v. Zinsmeister, decided June 21, 2012, the Supreme Court read the old definition, premises “owned or occupied,” to mean a landlord could be a statutory owner of a tenant’s dog. It limited that liability to attacks on the property or immediately adjacent to it, such as “on the sidewalk or just off the curb.” The boy in that case was attacked across the street, so the landlord was not liable.
2017. The General Assembly responded with House Bill 112, which took effect June 29, 2017. It changed “owned or occupied” to “owned and occupied” and added a separate category for premises “leased and occupied.” The session law shows the edit word for word.
2025. In Deramos v. Anderson Communities, decided February 20, 2025, the Supreme Court read the 2017 change to mean that “landowners are only considered dog owners for strict liability purposes if they both own and occupy the premises.” It did not decide whether the apartment company in front of it was an owner. What it decided was that a tenant who alleged she was attacked in a common area by a neighbor’s pit bull, a breed on the complex’s own restricted list, could go forward with her negligence claim instead of having it dismissed at the outset. “A negligence claim can proceed even where a separate strict liability claim, especially one that was never pleaded, might fail.”
So, plainly: as the Supreme Court read the 2017 wording, a landlord who does not live on the property does not fit the property-based part of the owner definition, but can still be sued for negligence. Older Kentucky decisions, McDonald v. Talbott (1969) and Ireland v. Raymond (1990), looked at the landlord’s knowledge of the dog’s dangerous propensities and control over the place of the attack. In McDonald, repeated complaints to the landlord about the dog were enough to send the case to trial. A property owner who lives on the premises and permits someone else’s dog to remain there fits the statute’s definition of owner.
One year. KRS 413.140(1)(a) requires an action for an injury to the person to be filed within one year after it accrued, and for a dog bite that is the date of the bite. It surprises people who have read that injury claims get two years.
Do not plan around the last day. Quarantine records, animal control files, and fresh wound photographs disappear long before a year is up. Our guide to the dog bite statute of limitations explains how these clocks interact.
Kentucky’s reported cases show the range. In one, a delivery route manager attacked by a chained Great Dane suffered wounds to his forearm, both hands, rib cage, and shoulder. In Deramos, the victim alleged injuries to her nose and both hands, surgery on one hand, and counseling for post-traumatic stress disorder.
A Kentucky dog bite claim seeks the losses the bite caused. In the 2025 Deramos case, for example, the injured tenant sought past and future medical expenses, pain and suffering, and compensation for the loss of her own dog. Your own fault, if any, reduces the total by your percentage.
Kentucky has no cap on any of it. Section 54 of the Kentucky Constitution says: “The General Assembly shall have no power to limit the amount to be recovered for injuries resulting in death, or for injuries to person or property.” Against a private owner or landlord, the practical ceiling is the defendant’s insurance and assets.
Limits do exist when government is the defendant. A claim against the Commonwealth before the Board of Claims is limited to $250,000 per claim, and $400,000 in total where one act injures several people. A claim against a city or other local government cannot exceed the plaintiff’s total damages, reduced by the fault of others.
Punitive damages are available but hard to win. KRS 411.184 requires clear and convincing proof that the defendant acted with oppression, fraud, or malice. In Williams v. Wilson (1998), the Supreme Court held the statute’s narrow definition of malice unconstitutional, so gross negligence remains a basis for punitive damages. The focus is the defendant’s conduct, not ownership: KRS 411.186 tells the jury to weigh factors such as the likelihood that serious harm would arise from the defendant’s misconduct and the defendant’s awareness of that likelihood.
If a dog attack causes a death, Section 241 of the Constitution and KRS 411.130 allow a wrongful death action by the personal representative, with punitive damages where the act was willful or the negligence gross. Separately, when a person is injured, KRS 411.145 lets the injured person’s husband or wife recover for loss of consortium. For more detail, see dog bite compensation.
Kentucky’s state dog statutes do not use the dangerous or potentially dangerous dog labels many states use. They have one category, the vicious dog, and only a court can create it. KRS 258.095(7) defines a vicious dog as “any individual dog declared by a court to be a vicious dog.”
The process belongs to the victim. Under KRS 258.235(5), any person who has been attacked by a dog, or someone acting for that person, may file a complaint in district court charging the owner or keeper with harboring a vicious dog. If the court finds the person charged is the owner or keeper, and that the dog “viciously and without cause, attacked a human being when off the premises of the owner or keeper,” the owner faces a fine of $50 to $200, 10 to 60 days in jail, or both, under KRS 258.990(3)(b). The court must order the dog kept securely confined, or may order it destroyed.
Confinement is strict: a locked enclosure at least seven feet high, or a locked kennel run with a secured top, leaving only for the veterinarian or a shelter, muzzled. A declared vicious dog found running at large may be killed by an animal control or peace officer.
A declaration does not create civil liability, since KRS 258.235(4) already does. What it gives you is an official finding about the dog and a court order the owner must obey. Kentucky’s state dog statutes in chapter 258 do not single out any breed, though cities and counties may pass their own ordinances, and under KRS 258.195 every county must have an animal control officer, who can issue citations.
Kentucky puts the reporting duty on the doctor first. Under KRS 258.065, every physician must report a person bitten by a dog to the local health department within 12 hours of first treating them, with the person’s name, age, sex, and location. If a child is bitten and no physician attends, the parents or guardian must make the report. If an adult is bitten and no physician attends, the adult or whoever is caring for them must report it. If the health department is closed, the report is due on its next working day.
Report it even if a doctor will too, because the report creates the dated official record your claim depends on. Here is what happens after a dog bite is reported.
Under KRS 258.085, a health officer may quarantine a dog that bit a person for up to ten days, or order it destroyed and tested for rabies instead. State regulation 902 KAR 2:070 requires that a dog destroyed for testing be killed in a way that keeps the brain intact. The owner pays for the quarantine and testing.
Every Kentucky dog must be vaccinated against rabies by four months of age under KRS 258.015, then revaccinated one year after the first shot and on schedule after that. A 2026 law, effective July 15, 2026, lets a Kentucky-licensed veterinary technician give the vaccine under a veterinarian’s on-site supervision. Cities and counties may adopt stricter rabies rules. If the dog’s vaccination status is unknown, read about being bitten by an unvaccinated dog.
Rabies in Kentucky dogs is not zero: the state’s rabies brochure lists one rabid dog among Kentucky’s confirmed cases in 2019. The state rabies program page says to wash a bite with soap and water for at least ten minutes and then call a doctor or go to an emergency room.
Kentucky is not among the states named in the most recent national claims report, so that report gives no Kentucky average. What it does give is a national number. For 2025, the Insurance Information Institute and State Farm reported that the average dog-related injury claim cost $65,450, across 28,450 claims. That is an industry average of every claim large and small. It is not a settlement value and it does not predict any one Kentucky case.
What actually moves the number in Kentucky:
For more on value, see dog bite settlement amounts, and use our dog bite settlement calculator for a rough range.
In most Kentucky dog bite cases the money comes from a homeowners or renters liability policy rather than from the owner’s own pocket. The Insurance Information Institute says these policies typically cover dog-bite liability up to the policy’s limits, usually $100,000 to $300,000, and that the owner is responsible for anything above the limit.
Several Kentucky-specific points follow from the law above.
Insurers also watch the calendar. Friendly calls and small document requests can run out a one-year clock. Ask early, in writing, for the carrier’s name and the policy limits, and do not take the owner’s word that there is no insurance.
For the full sequence, read our guide on how to file a dog bite claim.
Dog Bite Laws handles dog attack cases, and Kentucky rewards getting the details right early. The statute gives you strict liability, so the real work is elsewhere: filing inside a one-year window, identifying every statutory owner in the household, spotting the landlord negligence claim the 2017 amendment did not touch, keeping you out of the statutory owner trap if you were caring for the dog, and holding down the percentage of fault an insurer will try to assign you under pure comparative fault.
We deal with the insurer so that you do not have to, collect the health department and animal control records before they go stale, and build the medical record that shows what a scar or hand injury will mean over a lifetime. We work on a contingency fee, so there is nothing to pay to start and no fee unless we recover money for you. Founding attorney Michael Agruss built the firm around injury clients who need someone else to carry the paperwork.
We take dog bite cases across Kentucky, including Louisville, Lexington, Bowling Green, Owensboro, Covington, and Richmond. If you or your child was bitten, contact us for a free consultation, and do it soon, because the one-year clock is already running. We will tell you honestly whether there is a claim worth bringing.
No. KRS 258.235(4) makes the owner responsible for damage the dog causes, and in Maupin v. Tankersley (2018) the Supreme Court of Kentucky called that strict liability. You do not need to prove an earlier bite, that the owner knew the dog was aggressive, or that the owner was careless. Your own conduct can still lower the award under comparative fault.
Generally one year from the bite, under KRS 413.140(1)(a). A child's own claim can be filed until one year after the child turns 18, but a parent's claim for the child's injury should be treated as running one year from the bite. A claim against a state agency goes to the Board of Claims, also within one year, with no extra time for a child.
Yes. Kentucky follows pure comparative fault, so your award is reduced by your percentage of fault but never barred, even if your share is larger than the owner's. Maupin directs that the jury first decide whether the defendant owned the dog, then consider whether you failed to use ordinary care for your own safety, then reduce the damages by your share.
Sometimes, but usually through negligence rather than strict liability. Since a 2017 amendment, the property-based part of the owner definition covers premises a person both owns and occupies, or leases and occupies, and in February 2025 the Supreme Court of Kentucky read that to mean landowners are statutory owners only if they both own and occupy the premises. In the same case it allowed a tenant who alleged she was attacked in an apartment common area to go forward with a negligence claim against the landlord, so what the landlord knew and controlled is the key.
Possibly, but not under the strict liability statute. Kentucky treats anyone who has a dog in their care as an owner, and Kentucky's Court of Appeals has held that a groomer and a paid dog walker could not sue the dog's legal owner under the statute. In the dog walker's case the court also said that an owner who is not strictly liable is not necessarily exempt from negligence, so ask a lawyer whether a negligence claim fits your facts.
Not against a private owner or landlord. Section 54 of the Kentucky Constitution forbids the legislature from limiting recovery for personal injury or death. Limits apply only when government is the defendant, such as the $250,000 per claim limit at the Board of Claims for claims against the state. Punitive damages require clear and convincing proof of conduct such as gross negligence.
A physician who treats the bite must report it to the local health department within 12 hours. If no physician is involved, the bitten adult, or a parent for a child, must report it. The health officer can then confine the dog for up to ten days of rabies observation, or order it destroyed and tested, at the owner's expense.
«*» indica los campos obligatorios
Ponte en contacto con nosotros por teléfono, correo electrónico, mensaje de texto o chat para hablar de tu caso.
«*» indica los campos obligatorios