Missouri Personal Injury Lawyer Blog

When analyzing a dog bite case in Missouri, it can be very important to first determine if the owner of the dog was the owner of the premises or just renting. This can be important in determining liability and what insurance would be available to assist in paying that pile of medical bills.

Fortunately for victims of dog bites, Missouri law has recently made a switch in making dog owners strictly liable to the victims. This means that they can be found personally liable for the violent actions of their dogs whether or not the dog has had a propensity for violence in the past or not. This is particularly true in instances where the attack occurred on property in which the dog owner personally owned.

Likewise, if the dog’s owner is renting the property where the dog bite occurred, it would seem to make sense that one would be able to hold the owner of the property liable for this attack as well. However, Missouri law has made it difficult to attribute liability to the true owner of the property if that person is simply renting it out to the dog owner. In order for the home owner to be held liable, the burden is on the victim to prove the home owner actually “harbored” the animal. This term seems ambiguous and is subject to debate, but for now courts have held it to mean actual control over the animal.

While it can be helpful to show that the dog owner had knowledge the dog was there, in most cases it just isn’t enough. Therefore, the focus of any victim of a dog bite should be on the actual owner of the dog, and if that person was a renter, it is crucial to immediately determine whether that person has renters insurance.

In most situations, if you are not personally familiar with the dog’s owner, it can be difficult to judge whether the person actually owned the home or was a renter. With the help of our investigators, the St. Louis dog bite attorneys at Page Law can help you make that determination and give valuable advice on how to pursue your case.