Property Owner Liability for Child Injuries and Dog Bites

*Collaborative Post

U.S. insurers paid approximately $1.86 billion for 28,450 dog-related injury claims in 2025, according to the Insurance Information Institute and State Farm. The number of payouts swelled by 25.6% compared to the same period in 2024.

Keeping a land or a building safe enough for visitors, with particular regard to children, is a legal obligation for a property owner. There may be questions about the liability of the property owner for injuries sustained by a child from any hazardous situation that was not properly supervised or by any animal that was kept unreasonably exposed.

Lawsuits involving dog bites are often difficult to handle since dog-bite laws are not uniform in every state. “Are you liable if a kid gets hurt on your property?” The appropriate reply to these questions would have to account for the state’s legislation regarding leash laws, liability, and valid defenses.

Let’s look at how liability can apply to child injuries and dog bites and what current U.S. statistics show. 

A Dog Bite Usually Skips the Negligence Question

In states that apply the rule of strict liability, the conventional argument that blames the owner of the animal is normally not used. California’s Civil Code section 3342 prescribes that owners of offending dogs should be accountable if their pets injure a person who is authorized to inhabit a public area or even someone who is in private territory. Liability can be assigned to the dog owner regardless of whether that dog has a history of aggressive behavior or there was any prior knowledge of danger. California courts can still reduce a victim’s recovery if their conduct, such as provoking the dog, contributed to the injury.

People who get confused by negligence rules associated with dog bite incidents should not hesitate to consult a legal professional. Employing the services of a San Diego dog bite lawyer could help explain the negligence principle that applies to a dog bite incident.

Children Get a Separate Rule Inside the Same Statute

Connecticut also has strict liability. Pursuant to the provisions of § 22-357, a dog owner or keeper is liable for any injury or damage caused by the dog to a person or property, except in cases where the injured person was either trespassing or provoking the dog.

When the injured minor was under seven at the time, the law presumes the child was not trespassing and was not engaged in provoking the dog. The burden of proving otherwise sits with the defendant. A homeowner arguing that a five-year-old provoked the animal begins that argument, already losing it.

Connecticut courts have ruled that petting an animal is not provoking and that playful activities do not constitute torment. In actual proceedings, these distinctions are very narrow.

A Child Who Was Never Invited Is Still Owed Something

Most states owe an adult trespasser almost nothing beyond a duty not to injure him willfully. Children are treated differently through the rule in section 339 of the Restatement of Torts.

Did the owner know or have reason to know that children were likely to trespass at that location? Did the owner know or have reason to know that the condition posed an unreasonable risk of death or serious harm to them? Would the children, because of their youth, fail to discover the condition or appreciate that risk? Was the burden of removing the danger, weighed against the owner’s own use for keeping it, slight compared to the risk it posed to children? And did the owner fail to take reasonable care to eliminate the danger or otherwise protect them? These questions are asked when referring to this rule.

Where the Two Problems Meet

When a person’s dog bites a child outside of the owner’s premises, personal injury laws usually apply. This logic stems from the fact that the law normally compels those responsible to take care of their animals in such situations. An individual can always file a dog bite case in circumstances where the owners have not tried to put in place some preventive measures.

The practical exposure is larger than most people carry. Typical homeowners’ and renters’ liability limits run from $100,000 to $300,000, and the average dog-related claim nationally reached $65,450 in 2025, with New York and Connecticut running well above that. Anything past the policy limit comes out of the owner personally.

The factors that mitigate risk are simple. An example could be installing an automatic locking gate or setting up a pool enclosure. 

Checking with your insurer whether or not your breed of dog is excluded by your insurance company prior to claiming will prevent problems when such incidents occur.

*This is a collaborative post. For further information please refer to my disclosure page.