There are many reasons why landlords might ban tenants from having pets on the premises. Pets are noisy and can potentially disturb other tenants or nearby neighbors. They can also cause significant damage, scratching floors, walls, and furniture throughout a rental property. But perhaps the most serious risk associated with allowing pets—particularly dogs—is the potential for attacks and injuries.
A dog bite incident can lead to severe injuries, including deep wounds, infections, nerve damage, and permanent scarring. In some cases, victims may require emergency medical attention, surgery, or long-term rehabilitation. The financial burden of medical bills can be overwhelming, leaving victims wondering who is responsible for covering their expenses. Many turn to the owner of the dog for compensation, but what happens when the attack occurs on rented property?
Can a landlord be held liable for a tenant’s dog attack, just as homeowners are responsible for their own pet’s actions? Understanding a landlord’s duty of care in these situations is crucial for injury victims seeking justice. In this blog, we’ll break down when a landlord may be responsible for a dog bite injury, how insurance policies such as renter’s insurance or liability insurance might come into play, and whether you may have grounds for legal action. If you’ve been injured in a dog bite incident, speaking with a personal injury attorney can provide the legal advice you need to determine your options.
Landlord Liability for Dog Bites: Premise Liability Basics
When you sue someone for injuries that occur on another person’s property, this falls under an area of law known as premises liability. Property owners—including landlords—have a duty of care to ensure that their rental property is reasonably safe for tenants and visitors who are lawfully on the premises. This typically involves maintaining common areas, ensuring fire safety, addressing structural hazards, and complying with building codes. If a landlord fails in these responsibilities, they may be held accountable.
However, if a dog bite incident occurs because of a tenant’s dog, liability is less straightforward. In most cases, the owner of the dog is primarily responsible for any injuries. This falls under occupier’s liability, meaning that the tenant, not the landlord, is seen as the one in control of the premises where the attack occurred. In this situation, a homeowner’s insurance policy or renter’s insurance may cover the victim’s medical bills, depending on the tenant’s insurance policies.
That said, a landlord may be held liable if they had actual knowledge of the dangerous dog and failed to take appropriate action. Awareness plays a critical role in determining liability. For example, if the landlord received written complaints from neighbors about a vicious dog or witnessed aggressive behavior firsthand but did nothing, they could be held accountable. But if the landlord never becomes aware of the issue, they cannot reasonably be expected to take action. In the case of a dog, a landlord might not even be aware of the animal’s presence – as many tenants sneak pets into their homes and violate no-pet restrictions. Even if a landlord is aware of the animal’s presence, they may still escape liability if they had no idea how dangerous the dog was before the attack.
Understanding strict liability laws in your state is also important. Some states hold dog owners strictly liable for bites, regardless of prior behavior, while others require proof that the landlord knew or should have known about the dog’s viciousness. If you’ve been injured on rental property, seeking legal advice from a personal injury attorney can help you determine whether the landlord or tenant should be held responsible.
Things to Consider When Attempting to Hold A Landlord Accountable
Was There A History of Violence?
If you want to hold the landlord liable for your dog bite injury, one strategy is to show that the landlord was aware or should have been aware that the dog was dangerous. You can do this by establishing that the dog had a clear history of vicious propensities that was common knowledge for the entire community. For example, the dog may have bitten numerous victims in the past. Even the landlord themselves might have been attacked by the dog during a visit to the landlord’s property. Perhaps the landlord saw strange wounds on the tenant, suggesting that they had been attacked by their own dog.
Proving this awareness is not always easy, but it is certainly within the realm of possibility. A landlord may have exchanged text messages with the tenant that detail these past violent incidents. The landlord may have also received written complaints from neighbors who feared for their safety and that of their children due to the vicious dog’s presence. This is particularly relevant in cases involving breeds that some insurance companies classify as high-risk, such as pit bulls or rottweilers. However, it is important to note that this does not work if the dog was simply loud or threatening in the past. Usually, you need to show that the dog has bitten someone or attacked them in some way to establish this history of violence.
Is There Any Evidence of Harboring?
Another relevant concept in this discussion is “harboring.” A landlord is said to have “harbored” a dangerous dog if they take actions to care for it or control it in some way. This might include taking care of the dog personally or creating very clear rules and restrictions regarding the animal. This might sound counterintuitive at first. After all, if a landlord makes an effort to control the vicious dog and limit the amount of damage it causes, doesn’t this mean that the landlord is less liable for future attacks?
Dog bite law does not see it that way. The logic is that by stepping away from the entire situation and allowing the tenant to take full responsibility for controlling the animal, the landlord wipes their hands of the entire issue. But once they start actively getting involved in the matter by creating rules and regulations, the animal starts to become their responsibility.
This can lead to slightly confusing situations due to the interplay between Illinois’ Dog Bite Statute and principles of landlord liability. For example, a landlord can be aware that the tenant lets their dog roam free across the apartment complex with no leash or chain and still face no consequences. But if the landlord specifically tells the tenant that they must keep their dog chained up, then the landlord could be liable for future injuries. Of course, a landlord may be held liable regardless if the dog has a known history of violence. However, in some cases, a landlord’s actual knowledge of the dog’s history does not even factor into the equation, and courts only consider whether or not the landlord harbored the animal.
One example of this arose in Smaxwell v. Bayard, a case in Wisconsin from 2004. It is also worth mentioning that a landlord could theoretically be held liable for dog attack injuries that occur outside of their property. We have seen these decisions in the past in various states—especially when it is established that the landlord was harboring the animal.
Did the Landlord Actually Have the Ability to Remove the Dog?
Sometimes, a landlord’s hands are tied, and they cannot remove the dog. According to Fair Housing laws in Illinois, a person with a service animal cannot be denied housing based on their animal. This includes emotional support animals (ESAs). Note that it is fairly easy to get a dog classified as an ESA, as the only requirement is a letter from a licensed mental health professional.
Since almost anyone can be diagnosed with something like depression or anxiety, this effectively means that any animal can be classified as an ESA. Tenants may bring an ESA or a service animal into the home after moving in, or they may attempt to move in with an ESA or service animal already in their care. This can create legal complexities for landlords, as insurance companies often have breed restrictions for coverage. Some insurance policies may even exclude coverage if a tenant owns a high-risk breed, such as a pit bull or rottweiler.
That said, a landlord could still potentially harbor a service animal or ESA, and this could lead to unique legal issues for courts in Illinois. If a landlord takes steps to control the animal or enforce rules regarding its behavior, they may unknowingly assume liability in the event of an attack. This is an important consideration for landlords managing rental properties—especially in apartment complexes where multiple tenants share common areas.
Where Can I Find a Qualified Dog Bite Injury Attorney?
Where Can I Find a Qualified Dog Bite Injury Attorney? If you are a dog bite victim who has been searching the Chicago area for a qualified dog bite injury attorney, look no further than the law firm of Palermo Law Group. We know how traumatic and life-changing a dog bite injury can be, and we are here to guide you toward a positive outcome. In many dog bite cases of this nature, you may be able to sue the landlord to receive a much greater settlement compared to suing a tenant. This can provide you with enough funds to cover your medical expenses, missed wages, emotional distress, and much more. Remember, the statute of limitations may prevent you from suing if you wait too long, so book your free consultation today with experienced dog bite lawyers.
