The plaintiff brought a civil action under the Dog Owners’ Liability Act after a dog owned by the defendants jumped on her in a parking lot, causing puncture wounds and scratches.
The defendants admitted ownership of the dog but disputed that the injuries were caused by a bite, asserting the dog was muzzled at the time.
The court held that liability under the Dog Owners’ Liability Act is strict once a bite or attack is established and that the defendants, as owners, were jointly and severally liable for damages resulting from the attack.
However, the court found insufficient evidence to conclude that the injuries were caused by a bite rather than by the dog’s paws or claws.
Based on comparable case law and the limited evidence of injury, the court awarded modest general damages and declined to find contributory negligence.
