Prevent a Puppy from Biting to Avoid Future Dog Bite and Animal Attack Incidents

 Biting is not uncommon with young puppies and new dogs. Therefore, it is important for the dog owners to teach a puppy at the very beginning of the raising period to avoid the said bad habit.

Nevertheless, a dog is ninety-nine percent (99%) loving, sweet, and adorable and it’s only one percent (1%) that the dog is more likely to bite or attack.

There are actually many causes of biting, but still, an owner can absolutely teach a puppy or a dog to avoid biting and here is how:

•    Reprimand alone can never stop a dog from biting. Since puppies were taken away from their natural habitat right before their learning is completed, owners should take the responsibility of teaching them what is good and what is not. 

•    If no respect was shown to the animal, its biting could get harmful and worsen over time. Sometimes biting could also lead to animal attack. Owners should understand that, like humans, puppies also need a littermate or play pal so if an owner acts like a littermate to them, they will treat you back as one.

•    Show the dog or the puppy that they can trust you. If they feel that their owner cannot be trusted, they will have the possibility to bite or attack due to their fear and lack of confidence. 

•    Train puppies and dogs with consistency. Never let a puppy or a dog bite at times since if you do, you will never get rid of its biting habit. 

•    Make the puppy understand that it is the biting habit that you hate and not the puppy itself. After reprimanding a puppy for its wrong deed, make up thereafter to earn its trust and make it confident with you again.

Most owners usually wait until a problem occurs and get worst before taking proper precautions. But remember, it is better to be prepared  than being totally ignorant when problems arise.

Owners are completely liable for all dog bite and animal attack incidents. Therefore, they should realize that it takes a lot of time and effort in dealing with such incidents. Owners likewise have to face many circumstances such as the victims’ personal injury claim as well as the court litigations. After the litigation, the dog owner till has to pay for the victim’s lawyer’s fee, damages, and other legal cost.

Injury lawyers are experienced in getting through a case’s hurdles. A Los Angeles injury attorney knows that well. Thus, an owner will definitely have a hard time dealing with such situations. So, better take the above precautions to avoid headaches associated with dog bite and animal attack claims.

Foreseeability of Harm in Animal Attacks

Reasonable foreseeability of harm may be considered as a vital factor in determining liability in a personal injury case such as animal attacks.

Take the case posted on August 29, 2008, entitled “Dog Bite: Absentee Owner Can Be Liable If They Allow Dog on the Premises”. Here, a property owner was held liable for the harm done by a dog owned by one of his contracted workers after the dogs attacked a fellow worker. Salinas v Martin (August 28, 2008) First District, Division 1, Case No. A119733 prohibits.

Based on the article, a property owner had contracted a group of workers to do renovation job on his house. Several men worked on the project as sub-contractors and gardeners. All of them had access to the premises. The gardeners, whom the owner hired to do the landscape, had two dogs, a pit bull and a pit bull mix.

The homeowner knew about the dogs and given the gardeners the permission to allow the dogs on the premises. The dogs were free to run around in the fenced-in back yard.

One weekend, as one worker went to the job site to retrieve some scaffolding, he was attacked and bitten by the pit bull.

The trial court granted summary judgment to the homeowner, holding him to the same standard as a residential landlord who must have actual knowledge of a dog’s dangerous propensity before he or she can be held liable.

The Court of Appeal reversed the verdict and held the property owner to the usual standard according to the doctrine of reasonable foreseeability of harm. In this case, the Court of Appeal held that it was foreseeable that the pit bull would attack another worker and thus the homeowner could be held liable for the injuries sustained by the animal attack victim.

In animal or dog attacks, foresee ability of harm may be determined by these factors:

• The dog’s behavior prior to the attack
• The history of attack incidents, if there are any

To pursue claims in an animal attack, a victim must seek the assistance of a lawyer with experience in handling cases of this nature.

Victims Bite Back Against Animal Attack

Have you ever been bitten or attacked by an animal? If you have, or you know anybody who has been attacked or bitten, then you or that person definitely has a claim for damages.

It does not matter whether the animal that bit or attacked you is wild or domesticated. So long as that animal is in the care of somebody else, that person will be liable for your damages.

A wild animal by definition is an animal in the state of nature. In most states, an owner or keeper of a wild animal will be strictly liable for any harm it causes whether or not the owner knew of the animal’s dangerous propensities. If you get bitten inside a petting zoo, that zoo may be liable. It does not matter also if the animals have been well trained like in animal shows. Similarly, the fact that the owner takes much care to prevent harm to others, so long as the animal in his or her possession hurts somebody, that somebody has a right to damages.

On the other hand, a domestic animal is defined as an animal that has been domesticated or habituated to live among humans. As with owner or keeper of wild animals, an owner or keeper of a domestic animal will be strictly liable for the harm it causes if two elements can be established: (1) Owner has reason to know the animal has a specific propensity to cause harm; and (2) Harm caused by the animal was due to that specific propensity.

Please be minded that in certain situations, people will be held responsible for damage even though they did not act negligently or intend to cause any loss or harm. This is called “strict liability”.

The strict liability theory may apply to people who keep wild animals, such as tigers or snakes, in their possession or care. Even though safety precautions such as cages or fencing may be in place, the keeper of the wild animals would be held legally responsible in the event of harm caused when the wild animals escape.

If you have been bitten or attacked by an animal, you can definitely to file a case of personal injury on the basis of animal attack.