Disponible las 24 horas del día, los 7 días de la semana
Disponible las 24 horas del día, los 7 días de la semana
Florida holds dog owners strictly liable for bites. Under Section 767.04, the owner of a dog that bites someone in a public place, or someone lawfully on private property, pays for the harm regardless of whether the dog had ever been vicious and regardless of whether the owner knew of any danger. Two things cut the other way: a properly posted Bad Dog sign can defeat that claim for most adult victims, and the 2023 tort reform law shortened the time to sue and added a rule that bars recovery for a victim found more than half at fault.
This page covers the bite statute and the broader damage statute, what you must prove, leash rules, who counts as an owner, the sign defense, Florida’s new fault rule, a child’s case, landlords, every deadline including claims against the government, injuries and damages, the medical bill evidence rule, the dangerous dog law rewritten by the Pam Rock Act in 2025, rabies reporting and quarantine, settlement value, and insurance. Much published material still says four years; below we explain which bites get two and which keep four.
Dog Bite Laws handles dog attack cases. Talk to us for free, and pay no fee unless we recover money for you.
Florida has had a dog bite statute since 1949. Section 767.04 says the owner of any dog that bites a person “while such person is on or in a public place, or lawfully on or in a private place, including the property of the owner of the dog,” is liable for the damages, “regardless of the former viciousness of the dog or the owners’ knowledge of such viciousness.” The Florida Supreme Court described the statute in Noble v. Yorke (1986) as imposing absolute liability on the owner regardless of scienter, meaning regardless of what the owner knew.
That is the opposite of the one bite rule some states still use, where the victim must prove the owner knew the dog was dangerous. In Florida the first bite counts.
A second statute reaches further. Section 767.01 makes a dog owner liable for “any damage done by the owner’s dog to a person.” No bite is required. In Kilpatrick v. Sklar (1989) a police officer was impaled on a fence while fleeing four Great Danes, and the Florida Supreme Court treated his case as a 767.01 claim subject to the defenses written into 767.04. In Parsons v. Culp (2021), a Florida appeals court applied the same rule to a woman hurt in a fall, not a bite, when a dog escaped its yard. A person knocked down by a lunging dog has a statutory claim to look at.
What about a negligence claim against the owner? In 1984 the Florida Supreme Court held in Belcher Yacht v. Stickney that the bite statute had replaced the common law against an owner in the situations it covers. In 1993 the Legislature added a sentence to Section 767.04 that the version quoted in that case did not have: the statutory remedy “is in addition to and cumulative with any other remedy provided by statute or common law.” Ask your lawyer whether a negligence count against the owner belongs in your complaint.
Against the owner under Section 767.04, the proof is short. You show four things:
A person is lawfully on the owner’s property when performing a duty imposed by Florida or federal law or postal regulations, or when there “upon invitation, expressed or implied, of the owner.” Mail carriers, guests, and customers all fit.
You do not have to prove the dog was vicious, that it had bitten before, or that the owner was careless. Those facts still matter: they can defeat the Bad Dog sign defense, and they are the heart of any claim against someone who is not the owner.
Against anyone other than the owner, such as a landlord or a dog sitter, the claim is negligence: a duty of care, knowledge of the danger, and a failure to act reasonably. So a Florida file holds two kinds of evidence. One proves the statutory claim: ownership, where you were, medical records, photographs. The other proves knowledge: prior complaints, prior bites, and what the owner said at the scene.
Chapter 767, Florida’s dog statute, has no general leash rule for dogs that have not been classified as dangerous. Leash and running at large rules come from local ordinances. Section 767.07 preserves the power of municipalities to prohibit, license, or regulate the running at large of dogs, and counties and cities across the state have their own animal control ordinances. Which ordinance applies depends on exactly where you were bitten.
State law does set two restraint rules. A dog classified as dangerous may not be outside a proper enclosure unless it is muzzled, restrained by a substantial chain or leash, and under the control of a competent person. And since July 1, 2025, Section 767.01 says that a dog owner who knows of the dog’s dangerous propensities must securely confine the dog in a proper enclosure, which the statute defines as a locked pen or structure with secure sides and a top, or indoors.
Against the owner, a leash violation is supporting evidence, not the basis of liability, because Section 767.04 already makes the owner pay without proof of fault. It helps most against arguments that you were partly to blame, and against anyone other than the owner. In deJesus v. Seaboard Coast Line Railroad (1973), the Florida Supreme Court explained that violating a statute written to protect a particular class of people from a particular kind of injury is negligence per se, while violating other statutes, such as traffic regulations, is only prima facie evidence of negligence. Ask your lawyer which category a local leash ordinance falls into where you were bitten.
The bite statute names one defendant: the owner. In Belcher Yacht, a marina’s attack dog bit a customer, and the Florida Supreme Court said that Section 767.04 “pertains only to the owner. It is silent as to the custodian or keeper of a dog who is not the owner.” The security guard handling the dog was not liable under the statute but could still be sued for his own negligence. In Kilpatrick v. Sklar the court reached the same result for a spouse who lived with the dogs but had no ownership interest in them: no claim under chapter 767.
So pin down ownership first. Licensing records, the rabies vaccination certificate, veterinary bills, and adoption papers all help. A business can be the owner, as the marina was.
Florida’s dangerous dog law has a wider definition: anyone possessing, harboring, keeping, or having control or custody of a dog, and the parent of an owner under 18. It is written for that part of chapter 767, and in Huie v. Wipperfurth (1994) a Florida appeals court declined to use it for the bite statute, holding that a kennel caring for a dog was not its owner under Section 767.04.
A dog walker, a kennel, a relative watching the dog, or a landlord can still be liable in negligence if they knew of the danger and failed to act. If you are not sure who owned the dog, read what determines ownership of a dog.
Many websites still say a Florida owner escapes liability if the victim provoked the dog. The 1979 statute, quoted by the Florida Supreme Court in Belcher Yacht, said no owner was liable when the victim “shall mischievously or carelessly provoke or aggravate the dog.” That language is gone. Today Section 767.04 says the victim’s own negligence that was a proximate cause of the bite “reduces the liability of the owner of the dog by the percentage that the bitten person’s negligence contributed.” Teasing a dog is now a fault argument that lowers the award, not an automatic defense. For background, see dog bite provocation.
Trespass works differently. The statute only protects people in a public place or lawfully on private property, so a trespasser is outside it.
The defense that actually ends Florida cases is the sign. An owner is not liable under the statute if, at the time of the bite, the owner “had displayed in a prominent place on his or her premises a sign easily readable including the words ‘Bad Dog.'” Three limits apply:
Whether a sign was prominent, readable, or there at all can be a jury question. Photograph the entry points the day of the bite. Assumption of risk is not a separate defense to the statutory claim: in Donner v. Arkwright-Boston (1978) the Florida Supreme Court held that an owner sued under Section 767.04 has only the defenses written into the statute, and in Kilpatrick (1989) it applied the same rule to claims under Section 767.01.
Florida changed its fault rule in 2023. For decades it used pure comparative fault: a victim’s own share of fault cut the award, but never wiped it out. House Bill 837, signed and effective March 24, 2023, added Section 768.81(6): in a negligence action, “any party found to be greater than 50 percent at fault for his or her own harm may not recover any damages.”
Run the numbers. A victim found 50 percent at fault is not greater than 50 percent, so that victim still recovers half. At 51 percent the recovery is zero.
The timing is not what most people expect. House Bill 837 says that, unless it provides otherwise, it applies to causes of action filed after March 24, 2023. So the fault bar turns on when the lawsuit is filed, not when the bite happened, and a bite from early 2023 that goes to suit now is under the new rule.
Does the bar reach a strict liability dog bite claim? Section 768.81 defines a negligence action to include claims based on strict liability, while Section 767.04 has its own rule that the bitten person’s negligence reduces the owner’s liability by percentage. Expect the insurer to argue that the bar applies.
That fight is usually about small things: reaching over a fence, approaching a dog that was eating. Write down what happened before an adjuster asks.
Florida law treats a bitten child differently in three ways that matter.
First, the sign defense does not reach a child under 6, so a Bad Dog sign on the gate does not protect the owner when a preschooler is bitten.
Second, a young child’s fault. In Swindell v. Hellkamp (1970), the Florida Supreme Court held that, absent a legislative declaration, a child under six “is conclusively presumed to be incapable of committing contributory negligence.” But in Reed v. Bowen (1987) the same court held that the dog bite statute, as then written, overrode that rule, and it let a jury decide whether a four-year-old had provoked the dog. The provocation clause has since been replaced by the bitten person’s comparative negligence, so expect the insurer to argue a young child’s fault and ask your lawyer how these cases apply. For an older child, the standard jury instruction quoted in Swindell asked what a reasonably careful child of the same age, mental capacity, intelligence, training, and experience would do under like circumstances. If an adjuster is blaming your child, read whether a child can provoke a dog.
Third, and most dangerous, the clock. Many states pause the deadline until a child turns 18. Florida mostly does not. Section 95.051 tolls the deadline for a minor only while the child has no parent or guardian, or the parent or guardian has an interest adverse to the child or has been found incapacitated, and even then the suit must be brought within seven years. A child with a parent at home generally has the same two years as an adult.
Parents have their own claim too. The Florida Supreme Court explained in Youngblood v. Taylor (1956) that a father could recover the medical expenses of treating his child’s injuries, and that this right of action was independent of the child’s. When the money is paid, Section 744.387 lets parents settle a child’s claim of up to $15,000 themselves, but a net settlement above $15,000 requires a legal guardianship, and once a suit is filed any settlement needs the court’s approval.
A landlord who does not own the dog cannot be sued under the bite statute, because Section 767.04 reaches only the owner. A Florida landlord can still be liable for a tenant’s dog under ordinary negligence law, and the courts have described when.
The leading case is Vasques v. Lopez, decided by the Fourth District Court of Appeal in 1987. A child was attacked by a pit bull while being cared for in a rented house. The court said a property owner may be liable for an attack by a tenant’s dog “if the landlord knows of the presence of the animal and its vicious propensity, and has the ability to control its presence.” It added two points that help victims:
The court reinstated a jury verdict against the landlord. Under that test, proof of what the landlord knew is central, and in Sutherland v. Pell (1999) the Second District Court of Appeal treated what a landlord should have known about a tenant’s dog as a fact question that could not be settled on the landlord’s own say-so.
Two more points. A business that keeps a guard dog can be the owner itself, as in Belcher Yacht. And since October 1, 2023, Section 767.14 allows public housing authorities, as well as local governments, to adopt policies dealing with dogs that have bitten or attacked people, so long as the policies are not specific to breed, weight, or size.
Landlord cases turn on proof of what the landlord knew, which disappears quickly. Get the names of anyone who complained to management.
This is where most published Florida information is out of date. House Bill 837 cut the time to sue for negligence from four years to two, now in Section 95.11(5)(a). The law says that change applies to causes of action “accruing after” March 24, 2023, which for a dog bite means the date of the bite.
One argument should not change your plans. Section 95.11 still gives four years to “an action founded on a statutory liability,” a line the Legislature left in place in 2023, and a lawyer could argue a dog bite statute claim fits it. Do not count on that argument. File within two years.
Treat even two years as a ceiling. The ten day rabies observation, the Bad Dog sign that might come down, and neighbors’ memories run on a much shorter clock. Our guide to the dog bite statute of limitations explains how these clocks interact.
Florida’s dangerous dog law gives a useful working definition. It defines a severe injury as any physical injury that results in broken bones, multiple bites, or disfiguring lacerations requiring sutures or reconstructive surgery. That definition was written to classify dogs, but it also describes the injuries that drive the larger civil claims.
One Florida point about rabies risk: the Florida Department of Health says outside cats, not dogs, are by far the most common domestic animal found to have rabies in the state, largely because they are often not kept up to date on vaccinations. That does not make a dog bite safe, and it is why the ten day observation of the dog matters. Keep a simple injury journal of pain, sleep, missed work or school, and appointments.
A Florida dog bite claim can include economic damages, meaning medical care past and future, lost wages, lost earning capacity, and out of pocket costs, and noneconomic damages such as pain, scarring, disfigurement, and mental anguish. Chapter 768, the part of Florida law that governs negligence damages, caps what a government defendant pays and caps punitive damages, but it sets no dollar cap on noneconomic damages against a private dog owner.
How medical bills are proved changed in 2023. Section 768.0427, created by House Bill 837, applies to lawsuits filed after March 24, 2023:
Punitive damages are possible but hard. Under Section 768.72 they require clear and convincing evidence of intentional misconduct or gross negligence, defined as conduct so reckless that it showed a conscious disregard for the safety of others, and they cannot be pleaded until the court finds a reasonable evidentiary basis. Section 768.73 generally caps them at the greater of three times compensatory damages or $500,000, with no cap where the defendant specifically intended harm.
Against a government defendant there are no punitive damages and no interest before judgment, and payment is capped at $200,000 per person and $300,000 per incident unless the Legislature passes a claim bill. A bill to raise those caps passed both chambers in 2026 and was vetoed by the Governor on June 30, 2026. For a general overview, see dog bite compensation.
Florida rewrote its dangerous dog law in 2025. The Pam Rock Act, in effect since July 1, 2025, made immediate confiscation mandatory in the most serious cases, added a liability insurance requirement for owners of dangerous dogs, and raised criminal penalties.
Under Section 767.11, a dangerous dog includes one that, according to the records of the appropriate authority, has aggressively bitten, attacked, or endangered a person, or inflicted severe injury on a person, on public or private property. Here is how it works under Section 767.12:
The penalties climb from there. If a dog already declared dangerous bites without provocation, the owner commits a first degree misdemeanor and the dog is confiscated and destroyed after a 10 business day hearing window. If it causes severe injury or death, the owner commits a second degree felony. If a dog never declared dangerous causes severe injury or death and the owner knew of its dangerous propensities but showed reckless disregard, the owner commits a first degree misdemeanor, and a dog that kills a person is confiscated and destroyed.
A classification does not create your civil claim, since Section 767.04 already does. It gives you an official record and possibly a $100,000 policy. On breed, Section 767.14 lets local governments add rules for dogs that have bitten or attacked only if no such rule is specific to breed, weight, or size, and a 2023 law removed the exemption for local ordinances adopted before October 1, 1990. For what happens to a biting dog, read how many times a dog can bite before being put down.
The Florida Department of Health tells bite victims to call the local county health department or animal control agency with a description of the animal and where it is. Do it the same day. The report starts the rabies follow-up and creates the dated record your claim will rely on. Here is what happens after a dog bite is reported, and what happens if you don’t report a dog bite.
Others have reporting duties of their own. Section 381.0031 requires animal control officers to report any bite they learn of, and requires physicians, veterinarians, and hospitals to report diseases of public health significance to the Department of Health. The department’s reporting rule, Rule 64D-3.029 of the Florida Administrative Code, lists possible rabies exposure as a reportable condition when it leads to rabies shots for the person or testing, isolation, or quarantine of the animal. Reports go to the county health department where the bite happened.
For the dog, the department says it will either be quarantined for ten days or be tested for rabies. Whether you need rabies shots is for your doctor and the health department to decide, not the owner. A service dog with a current rabies vaccination is exempt from quarantine after a bite.
Florida requires every dog 4 months or older to be vaccinated against rabies by a licensed veterinarian, with a booster 12 months later, under Section 828.30. That section also gives a person who was bitten, or that person’s physician, the right to the information on the biting dog’s rabies vaccination certificate. Owner details on those certificates are otherwise kept from the public, so this is a reliable way to identify an owner who will not cooperate. If the dog’s vaccination was not current, read about being bitten by an unvaccinated dog.
We have not found a published average settlement figure for Florida dog bite cases. What exists is insurance data. For 2025, the Insurance Information Institute and State Farm ranked Florida second in the country for homeowners insurance dog bite claims, with 2,347 claims worth about $146 million in total and an average cost per claim of $62,375. The national average that year was $65,450, so Florida’s average claim cost sat slightly below the national figure. That is an industry average across every claim, minor and severe. It is not a settlement value, and it predicts nothing about one case.
What actually moves the number in a Florida case:
Our Florida average dog bite settlement page goes deeper on these factors, and the dog bite settlement calculator gives a rough sense of ranges.
In most Florida dog bite cases the money comes from the dog owner’s homeowners or renters policy, not from the owner’s savings. The Insurance Information Institute says these policies typically cover dog bite liability up to the policy’s liability limits, typically $100,000 to $300,000, and that the owner is responsible for anything above the limit.
Three Florida points matter here:
Two cautions about the adjuster. A recorded statement will be used to build the fault percentage that can now end a Florida claim outright, and an early offer usually arrives before anyone knows whether a scar will need revision.
For the whole process from start to finish, read how to file a dog bite claim.
Dog Bite Laws handles dog attack cases, and in Florida a strong claim can still be lost on details. The statute gives you strict liability against the owner. The work is everything around it: proving ownership, testing whether a Bad Dog sign really qualifies, defending against a fault percentage that can now wipe out a recovery, proving medical damages the way Section 768.0427 requires, finding every policy, and filing well inside a deadline cut in half in 2023.
We deal with the insurer so you do not have to, and we make sure an adjuster’s friendly questions do not turn into a percentage of fault assigned to you. We work on a contingency fee, so there is nothing to pay up front 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 Florida, including Miami, Orlando, Tampa, and Jacksonville. If you or your child was bitten, contact us for a free consultation. We will tell you honestly whether there is a claim worth bringing and how much time you have left.
Yes. Section 767.04 makes the owner liable when the dog bites someone in a public place or someone lawfully on private property, without any proof that the dog was vicious before or that the owner knew of a danger. The main exceptions are a properly posted Bad Dog sign, which does not apply to a child under 6 or when the owner's own negligence caused the harm, and the victim's share of fault, which reduces the award.
It depends on the date of the bite. For a bite after March 24, 2023, plan on two years, because House Bill 837 cut the negligence deadline from four years to two for claims arising after that date. A bite on or before March 24, 2023 keeps the four-year deadline. Claims against a government body need a written claim within three years and have their own rules, so check early.
It can. The statute protects an owner who displayed a prominent, easily readable sign including the words Bad Dog, and in Belcher Yacht (1984) the Florida Supreme Court let a Beware of Dog sign defeat the statutory claim of a man who admitted he had seen and understood it. But the defense does not apply to a victim under 6, or when the owner's negligent act or omission caused the damages, and the court has refused it to an owner who told a visitor to ignore the sign. Photograph the sign and its location right away.
Your award is reduced by your percentage of fault. In a lawsuit filed after March 24, 2023, though, a finding that you were more than 50 percent responsible for your own injury bars recovery completely. At exactly 50 percent you still recover half. That is why what you tell an insurance adjuster about how the bite happened matters so much.
Usually not. Unlike many states, Florida pauses the deadline for a minor only when the child has no parent or guardian, or the parent or guardian is incapacitated or has interests adverse to the child, and even then suit must come within seven years. A child living with a parent generally has the same deadline as an adult, so do not wait for the child to grow up.
Sometimes. The landlord is not the owner, so the strict liability statute does not apply, but a landlord can be liable in negligence. A Florida appeals court has held that a landlord who knew the dog was present and dangerous and had the ability to control its presence, including the right to end the tenancy, can be held responsible. Proof of the landlord's knowledge is the key.
The Florida Department of Health asks bite victims to call the county health department or animal control. The dog will then be quarantined and observed for ten days or tested for rabies, and animal control officers must report bites they learn of. Reporting also opens the door to a dangerous dog investigation and creates an official record that helps your claim.
«*» indica los campos obligatorios
«*» indica los campos obligatorios
Ponte en contacto con nosotros por teléfono, correo electrónico, mensaje de texto o chat para hablar de tu caso.