Luật sư chuyên về các vụ cắn người do chó gây ra tại Hạt Dekalb

DeKalb County is not one jurisdiction for leash purposes. The unincorporated county and each city write their own animal chapter, and the ordinance in force where the dog got to you is the one a court will look at. All of these were read on the official Municode code for each government.

• Unincorporated DeKalb. DeKalb Code chapter 5 requires restraint and control at all times off the owner’s property (section 5-4), bans dogs at large on county streets, in county parks outside designated off leash areas, on apartment and condominium common property, and on other people’s land (section 5-5), and prohibits tethering (section 5-3(d)). On the owner’s own property, a dog outside its enclosure must be on a leash or lead, or off leash under the direct control of a person who is present and obeyed.
• Atlanta, DeKalb side. Atlanta’s well known six-foot leash rule, section 18-124, applies only to the Fulton portion of the city. In the DeKalb portion, Atlanta Code sections 18-61 to 18-63 adopt DeKalb’s chapter 5 and make it unlawful to let a dog be out of control and unattended off the owner’s premises. A dog counts as under control on a leash, at heel, or beside a competent person and obedient to commands.
• Decatur. Section 14-34 requires a dog off its owner’s property to be on a leash or other device held by a competent person, in a vehicle, in an enclosure with the property owner’s permission, or under voice command inside a designated dog park.
• Brookhaven and Stonecrest. Each city’s section 5-4 requires a dog off the owner’s property to be under restraint and control, at heel or on a leash, which tracks the wording of the Georgia statute almost word for word.
• Tucker. Section 6-4, adopted in 2023, requires a lead or leash no longer than six feet off the owner’s property, outside marked off leash park areas.
• Dunwoody. Section 6-8 requires a dog off its owner’s property to be in a vehicle, in a secure enclosure, or securely restrained by a leash or other device held by a competent person.

Two cautions. First, the statute’s shortcut covers only an ordinance that required the dog to be at heel or on a leash, and the Court of Appeals reads those words literally. In Stennette v. Miller (2012), it held that a Cobb County rule making it unlawful to let an animal be out of the owner’s “immediate control and restraint” was not that kind of ordinance. In Philip v. Pollock (2025), it held that a rule requiring a dog to be indoors, in an enclosure, or on a leash was. Brookhaven’s and Stonecrest’s “at heel or on a leash” and Tucker’s six-foot leash rule use the statute’s own terms. Unincorporated DeKalb’s section 5-4 says only “restraint and control,” close to the Cobb wording in Stennette, so if you were bitten there, expect to have to prove the dog was dangerous and the owner knew it. The same care applies to the codes that also allow another device, voice control, or a dog walking beside its owner. Second, the ordinance has to be properly put into the court record, usually with a certified copy, or the court will not consider it. Write down the exact address of the bite on day one so the right code can be found.