Hoạt động 24/7
Hoạt động 24/7
Missouri holds a dog’s owner or possessor strictly liable when the dog bites someone without provocation, as long as the person bitten was on public property or lawfully on private property. That rule comes from RSMo 273.036, in force since August 28, 2009, and it means you do not have to prove the dog had bitten before or that the owner knew it was dangerous. The older common law claims did not go away. The statute says its remedies are cumulative, so a Missouri case can be built on several theories at once.
This page covers what you must prove, how city leash ordinances fit in, who counts as an owner or possessor, the provocation and criminal activity defenses, Missouri’s pure comparative fault rule, a child’s case, landlord liability, the five year deadline and the rules for government defendants, damages and punitive damages, the state’s dangerous dog law, reporting and rabies rules, and insurance. Missouri’s five year deadline is generous, but evidence fades on its own schedule, and the parts of a case that decide its value are usually gathered in the first weeks.
Dog Bite Laws handles dog attack cases. Talk to us for free, and pay no fee unless we recover money for you.
Missouri has a dog bite statute, and it is the most direct path to compensation. RSMo 273.036 says the owner or possessor of any dog that bites, without provocation, a person who is on public property or lawfully on private property “is strictly liable for damages suffered by persons bitten, regardless of the former viciousness of the dog or the owner’s or possessor’s knowledge of such viciousness.” The legislature added that sentence in House Bill 62, and it has read the same way since August 28, 2009.
Strict liability means a fenced yard, a good leash, or a dog with a clean history is no defense once the statute applies. That is a break from the one bite rule Missouri followed for generations. Before 2009, Missouri required proof that the owner knew or had reason to know the dog had dangerous propensities abnormal to its kind, and in Duren v. Kunkel (1991) the Supreme Court of Missouri repeated that the bare fact of a prior bite did not by itself establish a vicious propensity.
The statute also makes owners strictly liable for property and livestock damage their dogs cause, and says anyone held liable under it shall pay a fine of up to $1,000. The fine sits in a separate subsection from the damages the owner is liable for, so it is not your compensation.
Finally, section 273.036 says its remedies are “in addition to and cumulative with any other remedy provided by statute or common law.” Missouri recognizes claims for harm by a domestic animal in strict liability, premises liability, and negligence. Those claims still matter where the statute does not reach, such as a dog that knocked someone down without biting.
Read the statute closely and the claim has five parts:
What you do not need is just as important. You do not have to prove the dog had bitten before, that the owner knew it was aggressive, or that the owner was careless.
The common law claims ask more. The old strict liability claim requires proof that the dog had dangerous propensities abnormal to its class and that the owner knew or had reason to know it. A premises liability claim, recognized in Duren and applied to a dog bite in Wilson v. Simmons (2003), asks less: proof that the dog had normally dangerous propensities that posed a foreseeable danger to a guest, that the property owner had some knowledge of them, and that the owner failed to take reasonable steps to warn or protect. In Wilson the Western District reversed a ruling for the dog owners because the trial court had wrongly required proof of viciousness for every theory.
So a Missouri case runs on two sets of records: what proves the statutory claim (who had the dog, where you were, what happened just before the bite, your medical records), and the dog’s history (earlier complaints, prior bites, what the owner said afterward), which you need for the common law claims and punitive damages.
RSMo 322.020 bars dogs affected with or exposed to rabies from running at large anywhere in Missouri. Day to day leash and at large rules are set locally. Missouri law lets county commissions adopt rules on licensing, catching, impounding, and confining dogs, and on the “confinement, impounding and destruction of dogs displaying vicious propensities.”
A local leash ordinance can carry real weight in a Missouri civil case. In Jensen v. Feely (1985), a man conducting a survey for a city directory was bitten on a public street by an unleashed dog. The Western District held that the City of Independence’s at large ordinance created a civil cause of action and that a breach was actionable as negligence per se. To recover on that theory, the court said, the plaintiff needed to show only that an unleashed dog harbored by the defendant bit him on the public street and that the breach caused the injury. An earlier case, Shobe v. Borders (1976), reached the same result under the city’s prior ordinance after a loose dog grabbed a motorcyclist’s front wheel.
Since 2009, a bite case does not need that theory to establish liability. A leash ordinance claim still earns its place: it covers injuries the statute does not, such as a person knocked off a bike by a loose dog, and a citation in the animal control file is a dated official record of how the dog got loose. Whether a particular ordinance supports negligence per se depends on its wording, so ask a lawyer to pull the ordinance where you were bitten.
Section 273.036 reaches two kinds of defendant, the owner and the possessor, and defines neither word. If someone other than the owner had the dog when it bit, both may need to be named, and a lawyer can sort out who counts as a possessor.
The common law claims use a slightly wider group. Missouri courts allow negligence claims against owners, possessors, and harborers of a dog, and have refused to extend that liability to anyone else. A harborer, under the Restatement rule Missouri courts follow, includes a head of household who lets a family member keep a dog in the home. So when a teenager’s dog bites a visitor, a parent who runs the household may be responsible as well.
The line is drawn at control, not at past contact. In Miles v. Rich (2011), an adopted dog bit a child, and the court held the humane society that had placed the dog owed no negligence duty, because it did not own, possess, harbor, or control the dog when the bite happened. If you are not sure who had the dog, read what determines ownership of a dog.
One caution for people who were helping with the dog. The statute does not say whether someone who was herself a possessor of the dog at the time, such as a paid pet sitter, can use it against the owner. If you were watching, walking, or caring for the dog that bit you, say so on the first call with a lawyer.
That criminal activity rule has two limits written into it. Simple trespass on private property does not count unless the person was also committing or intending another crime, and trespass by a child under the age of twelve never counts.
Assumption of risk is harder. An insurer may say a groomer, veterinary worker, or kennel employee accepted the risk by doing the job. In Duren v. Kunkel, the Supreme Court of Missouri said that whether a plaintiff knew of the danger does not defeat the claim under comparative fault but leaves the assessment of fault to the jury. If your job put you near the dog, raise this with a lawyer early.
If you hurt the dog fighting it off, RSMo 273.033 gives an absolute defense, against criminal charges or a civil claim for killing or injuring the dog, to anyone who acted in reasonable apprehension of imminent harmful contact by the dog or to protect another person from it. The defense does not cover someone engaged in criminal activity at the time. See can you kill a dog that’s attacking you.
Missouri uses pure comparative fault. Your own share of the blame reduces what you recover, but it never wipes the claim out, whatever the percentage. The Supreme Court of Missouri adopted that rule in Gustafson v. Benda in 1983, directing that “this and future cases shall apply the doctrine of pure comparative fault” under the Uniform Comparative Fault Act. The statute often cited for the rule, RSMo 537.765, by its own terms covers products liability claims only, so for a dog bite the rule comes from Gustafson and from the dog statute itself.
Section 273.036 has its own fault sentence. If the person bitten had fault in the incident, the owner’s damages “shall be reduced by the same percentage that the damaged party’s fault contributed to the incident.” That is a reduction, not a bar.
Here is how the arithmetic works. If a jury values a bite at $100,000 and finds the victim 20 percent at fault, the award is $80,000. At 60 percent, the award is $40,000. In Duren v. Kunkel, a bull attack case, the jury found the plaintiff and the defendant each fifty percent at fault and valued the damages at $200,000, so the trial court entered judgment for $100,000. The Supreme Court of Missouri later reversed that judgment on other grounds and sent the case back for a new trial.
When several people share responsibility, Missouri’s joint and several liability statute, RSMo 537.067, matters too. A defendant found 51 percent or more at fault can be made to pay the whole judgment. A defendant below 51 percent pays only its own share. That is one reason to identify every owner, possessor, and harborer early.
Because the statute removes the question of the owner’s carelessness, the insurer’s main lever is your conduct. Be careful what you say in a recorded statement.
A child bitten in Missouri has much longer than an adult to bring a claim. RSMo 516.170 pauses the limitation period for anyone “within the age of twenty-one years” when the claim arose, and lets them sue within the normal period after that disability ends. Missouri courts have applied that pause until age 21 even though a person can file suit at 18. With the five year limit for personal injury, a child’s own claim generally runs until the 26th birthday.
The parents’ own claims are a different matter. In Wilson v. Simmons, the parents of a bitten nine year old sued in their own names for her medical expenses and the loss of her services, alongside the child’s claim. Section 516.170’s pause is written for the person who was under 21, so do not assume the parent’s claim for bills shares the child’s longer clock.
Expect the dog’s owner to raise your child’s behavior. What the statutes do say helps. The criminal activity defense does not apply to trespass by a child under twelve, and a child invited over to play is lawfully on the property. If an adjuster is pointing at your child, read whether a child can provoke a dog, then talk to a lawyer.
Be wary of an early settlement offer for a child’s scar. Ask the treating doctor what further care the scar may need before you weigh any offer.
Missouri courts have been reluctant to hold a landlord responsible for a tenant’s dog. In Mathes v. Nolan (1995), an Alaskan Malamute lunged over a fence and pulled a child onto the rental property. The landlord did not live there and did not own the dog. The Eastern District affirmed judgment for the landlord, quoting an earlier decision: “Missouri has adopted the Restatement view which rejects landlord liability and this court is bound by that position.”
The reasoning matters more than the result. Missouri’s common law dog claims require that the defendant possessed or harbored the dog, and the court held that owning the land where a tenant keeps a dog, even with permission, does not make someone a harborer.
That is not the same as saying a property owner is never responsible. Two situations look different:
For most tenant dog cases, the claim goes to the tenant who owns the dog and that tenant’s insurance.
Missouri gives five years for most injury claims. RSMo 516.120 sets five years for “any other injury to the person or rights of another, not arising on contract,” and also for an action upon a liability created by a statute. Under RSMo 516.100, the clock starts when the damage is sustained and capable of ascertainment. To be safe, count from the day of the bite.
Missouri does have ninety day written notice rules for claims against certain cities, in RSMo 82.210 for cities of 100,000 or more and RSMo 79.480 for fourth class cities. By their terms, those statutes cover injuries from a defect in a bridge, boulevard, street, sidewalk, or thoroughfare. They are not written for a dog bite, but if a government body is involved, give written notice early anyway.
The bigger obstacle with a government defendant is sovereign immunity. RSMo 537.600 keeps immunity in place except for listed situations, mainly motor vehicle accidents and dangerous conditions of public property. RSMo 537.610 waives immunity to the extent a public entity buys liability insurance or adopts a self insurance plan, caps recovery at a base of $300,000 per person and $2 million per occurrence adjusted every January, and bars punitive damages. Both sections were amended by Senate Bill 916, effective August 28, 2026. A bite by a police dog or a dog in a public shelter’s care needs a lawyer quickly.
Treat all of these as outside limits. Records and memories fade long before five years pass. Our guide to the dog bite statute of limitations walks through how these clocks interact.
A bite that heals in two weeks and a bite that leaves a child with a facial scar are both covered by section 273.036, but they are worth very different amounts.
Not every injury from a dog is a bite. People are knocked down, chased into the street, or thrown from a bicycle. Missouri’s statute covers bites only, so those cases are built on the common law and local leash ordinances instead. Read more about a dog attack without a bite.
Section 273.036 makes the owner liable for “damages suffered by persons bitten,” which covers the ordinary categories of injury damages:
Missouri’s best known noneconomic damages cap, in RSMo 538.210, is written for claims against health care providers. For medical bills, RSMo 490.715 allows the jury to hear evidence of the actual cost of care, meaning what was paid plus what is still owed after insurance discounts, so keep every explanation of benefits.
Punitive damages are available only on a strong showing. Under RSMo 510.261, you must prove by clear and convincing evidence that the defendant intentionally harmed you without just cause or acted with a deliberate and flagrant disregard for the safety of others. A punitive claim needs the court’s permission to add. RSMo 510.265 limits punitive awards to the greater of $500,000 or five times the net judgment, with exceptions, but in Lewellen v. Franklin (2014) the Supreme Court of Missouri held that cap unconstitutional as applied to a fraud claim, because that kind of claim was tried to a jury in 1820.
Two rabies chapter provisions are worth knowing. RSMo 322.140, which governs bite reports where a county has not adopted its own rabies rules, makes the owner responsible for the cost of testing the dog and testing and treating the exposed person. RSMo 322.145 says the owner of an animal that bites “shall be liable to an injured party for all damages done by the animal.” Ask a lawyer whether it adds anything in your case. If a family member died, Missouri’s wrongful death statute allows damages for lost support, services, companionship, and funeral costs, but not for grief itself. For more, see dog bite compensation.
Missouri’s main statewide dangerous dog law is a criminal statute, not a civil designation process. Under RSMo 578.024, a person commits the offense of keeping a dangerous dog if they own or possess a dog that has previously bitten a person or a domestic animal without provocation and that dog bites a person again.
The penalties climb with the harm:
The statute also reaches the dog. If a dog that has bitten before without provocation bites again, or if a dog with no prior bite attacks and causes serious injury to or the death of a person, the dog “shall be seized immediately” by animal control or the county sheriff. It is held ten business days after the owner gets written notice and then destroyed, unless the owner appeals to circuit court, which must hold a hearing within thirty days.
A prosecution or seizure does not pay you anything, but it is official evidence. A file showing the dog had bitten before supports the common law claim and any request for punitive damages.
Beyond the state statute, much of Missouri dog control is local. Counties may adopt rules for confining and destroying dogs that display vicious propensities, and cities write their own rules too. The Independence code discussed in Jensen v. Feely, for example, treated a dog that threatens a person as dangerous and required it to be confined. Check the local code where the bite happened, including any breed rules.
In Missouri, a dog bite is a reportable event. Under the state’s disease reporting rule, 19 CSR 20-20.020, a mammal bite to a person must be reported to the local health authority or the Department of Health and Senior Services within one calendar day. The duty falls on the physician, physician assistant, nurse, hospital, or clinic that treats you. The department’s public advice is to report a bite immediately, so report it yourself as well, to the local health department, because the report starts the observation of the dog and creates a dated official record. Here is what happens after a dog bite is reported.
Where a county has not adopted its own rules, RSMo 322.140 requires that a bite be immediately reported to the county health department, which passes it to the state. The department may then order the dog quarantined, impounded, or tested. The same section makes it a class A misdemeanor for the owner to sell, give away, transfer, or move the dog before it has been released.
The state health department’s guidance is that a healthy dog may be confined for ten days and observed for signs of rabies, and that ten day period is formally recognized only for dogs, cats, and ferrets. In some cases the dog is euthanized and tested instead. Whether you need rabies shots is for your doctor and the health department to decide, and the department’s rabies page sets out what to do after a bite.
If the owner cannot show the dog’s vaccinations are current, or nobody knows whose dog it was, read about being bitten by an unvaccinated dog. Not reporting has costs of its own, which we cover in what happens if you don’t report a dog bite.
An average would tell you little about your own claim, and the most cited figures are national insurance data. For 2025, the Insurance Information Institute and State Farm put the average cost of a dog related injury claim nationwide at $65,450, according to Triple-I and State Farm research. That is an industry average across every claim, large and small. It is not a Missouri figure and it does not predict any one case.
What actually moves the number in a Missouri case:
Our Missouri average dog bite settlement page works through these factors in more detail, and the dog bite settlement calculator gives a rough sense of ranges. For how injury severity is graded, see dog bite settlement amounts.
The dog owner’s homeowners or renters liability policy is usually the first place to look for payment. The Insurance Information Institute says homeowners and renters policies typically cover dog bite liability up to the policy’s liability limits, typically $100,000 to $300,000, and that anything above the limit falls on the dog owner. Get the policy’s declarations page early, because the limit shapes every settlement conversation.
A few practical points:
Expect an early, friendly call asking for a recorded statement. You do not have to give it.
For the sequence from beginning to end, read our guide on how to file a dog bite claim.
Dog Bite Laws handles dog attack cases, and Missouri is a state where the statute does much of the work if the case is put together correctly. The real fights are over provocation, where you were standing, who owned or possessed the dog, and your share of fault. Our work is to identify every owner, possessor, and harborer; get the animal control and health department records; find the history that supports a common law claim; locate every policy that might pay; and build the medical record that shows what the injury will cost over time.
We deal with the insurer so that you do not have to, and we push back when an adjuster tries to recast an accident as provocation. 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 Missouri, including Kansas City, St. Louis, Springfield, Columbia, Independence, and Lee’s Summit. 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.
Not for most bites. Since August 28, 2009, RSMo 273.036 has made a dog's owner or possessor strictly liable for an unprovoked bite to someone on public property or lawfully on private property, with no proof of earlier bites or of the owner's knowledge. The older rule still matters: proof that the owner knew the dog was dangerous supports the common law claims, which remain available alongside the statute.
Generally five years for an adult, under RSMo 516.120, and the safest course is to count from the day of the bite. For a child, Missouri pauses the clock until age 21, so the child's own claim usually runs to the 26th birthday. A wrongful death claim has three years. If a city, county, or other public body is involved, talk to a lawyer right away, because immunity rules can end the claim regardless of the deadline.
Yes. Missouri uses pure comparative fault, and the dog bite statute itself says the owner's damages are reduced by the same percentage as the victim's fault. A person found 30 percent at fault recovers 70 percent of the damages. Even a majority share of fault reduces the award without barring it, which is why insurers spend so much effort arguing that the victim provoked the dog.
Usually not. Missouri appeals courts have held that owning the property where a tenant keeps a dog, even with permission, does not make a landlord a harborer, and Missouri has rejected landlord liability under its common law rules. A landlord who owned, possessed, or harbored the dog is in a different position. In most tenant cases, the claim goes to the dog's owner and that person's renters or homeowners insurance.
Missouri's criminal activity defense to dog bite liability expressly does not apply to trespass by a child under twelve. The strict liability statute still covers only people on public property or lawfully on private property, and a child invited over to play is lawfully there. The owner's insurer may still argue provocation or fault, so write down how your child came to be in the yard and who else was there.
Missouri's noneconomic damages cap in RSMo 538.210 is written for claims against health care providers, not dog owners. Punitive damages are different: they require clear and convincing proof of intentional harm or deliberate and flagrant disregard for safety, need the court's permission to plead, and face a statutory limit that the Supreme Court of Missouri has held unconstitutional for at least some claims. Claims against a public body are capped and exclude punitive damages.
The doctor, nurse, hospital, or clinic that treats you must report the bite to the local health authority within one calendar day, and you should report it yourself to the local health department. A healthy dog may be quarantined for ten days, or in some cases euthanized and tested. Under state law, the owner may not sell, give away, or move the dog until health officials release it.
"*" là ký hiệu cho các trường bắt buộc
"*" là ký hiệu cho các trường bắt buộc
Hãy liên hệ với chúng tôi qua điện thoại, email, tin nhắn hoặc trò chuyện trực tuyến để trao đổi về trường hợp của bạn.