In Virginia, in order to successfully prosecute a claim for injuries you (or a loved one) suffered as a result of being bitten or otherwise attacked by a dog, the law requires that you prove a number of items.

However, before we get into the law of dog bite claims, I believe the following information will be very helpful:

Many folks who have been the victim of a dog bite or attack don't want to pursue a claim for their injuries because the person against whom they would have to make the claim is a neighbor, friend or even family member.

Certainly, this could be an uncomfortable situation; however, in the vast majority of cases, the dog owner has insurance to protect him.

A typical Virginia homeowner's or renter's policy will provide insurance to the dog owner, whether the bite, attack or injurious conduct occurred on or off the premises of the owner.

This means that the dog owner almost never pays anything in these types of claims.

Accordingly, please don't allow your claim to lapse because you think your neighbor or friend will have to pay you out of their savings.

People with dogs buy insurance because dogs hurt people and that insurance protects them and compensates you for your injuries.

Now that we have that out of the way, let's get into the law:

In order to successfully prosecute your claim, the first thing you must demonstrate is that the owner and/or custodian of the offending animal was negligent.

Negligence is defined as the owner or custodian failing to use ordinary care as a dog owner/handler or acting in an unreasonable fashion.

Most all local Virginia jurisdictions have specific code provisions governing animal ownership and behavior, as well as other statutes prohibiting certain animal conduct.

Generally, these statutes or ordinances prohit a dog from running unrestricted (also known as "running at large") or allowing the dog to be in the custody of someone who can not control the animal.

In addition, these code provisions provide for definitions of "vicious" and "dangerous" dogs or animals and contain certain regulations that an owner must follow if a dog fits that definition.

For years, the old adage "every dog has one bite," commonly referred to as the "one bite rule," had been accepted as a general concept of the law governing the dog owner's liability.

This rule meant that a dog owner had no liability for his animal's behavior until that dog had bitten someone (or some animal) and the owner knew of the "bad" behavior.

This general concept has been modified to some extent by most all local jurisdictions' ordinances, as well as by common law.

Under the current state of the law, the facts of primary importance are really:

1) what did the owner know about the animal's prior behavior? and

2) when did he know it?

For example, let's imagine a case in which a person is hurt by a dog jumping on him as he entered another person's house.

If the injured person can show that the dog owner/custodian knew that his dog was prone to jumping on people as they entered the house, then there is probably a good chance of proving that owner/custodian was negligent in failing to properly restrain the dog before the other person came into the house.

Source: Free Articles from ArticlesFactory.com