In Michigan, individuals who are attacked by a dog have three years from the date of the injury under MCL 600.5805(10) to bring their claim against the owner of the dog.  The proper Plaintiffs in a dog bite case would include the individual who was bit and personally injured by the dog, as well as their spouse, child, or parent.  If an individual was killed in a dog attack, the personal representative of the estate of the person attacked by the dog would be able to recover on behalf of the dead person’s estate as if she or he had lived.  The proper Defendant [those responsible for your injuries in a dog bite] would be the owner of the dog, the keeper of the dog or the possessor of that dog.  Ownership can be proved in Court by showing that an individual is either the registered owner or represents himself or herself to the public as the owner of that animal.  If the Defendant is not the owner, it should be determined whether he or she is the “keeper” or the “temporary caretaker” of that animal.  The distinction will often be a fact question for your jury depending on the degree of dominion or control the individual has over the animal itself.  Keep in mind that possession of an animal that is sufficient to give rise to “keeper” status however, cannot be fairly construed as anything short of the exercise of dominion and control similar to a substitution for that which ordinarily would be exerted by the owner possession.

Michigan law recognizes three potential cause of action arising out of a dog bite incident:

1. A statutory cause of action under the dog bite statute;
2. Common law strict liability against the owner; and/or,
3. Common law negligence.

The accidents can be pled in the alternative in your claim.  You are not required to focus on one particular dog bite cause of action.   The good news is that the dog bite statute creates almost strict liability for owners of the animal.  Under the statute, the only facts necessary to sustain your claim are that:

1. The dog bit the Plaintiff;
2. That the biting was without provocation;
3. That the Defendant owned the dog; and,
4. That the Plaintiff was lawfully at the location where the dog bite occurred.  Provocation is typically a fact question for a jury and actual ownership as mentioned above is required.

Common law strict liability actions are based on the theory that whoever knowingly keeps an animal accustomed to attacking and injuring persons is always liable to any person who is attacked and/or injured.  Generally this action requires proof that the owner or keeper of the animal knew of its vicious nature or vicious propensity as a prerequisite to a successful claim against that owner.

Since the statutory action applies only to an owner, common law strict liability will be pled if the animal was under the control of a “keeper”, not the actual owner when the alleged incident occurred.  The burden of loss under common law strict liability is allocated on an equitable basis to the party who was introduced to the potential danger into the community and either knows of the animal’s abnormal or dangerous propensity, or has the animal long enough to be chargeable with notice of its dangerous habits.

A common law negligence claim is available without regard to whether the owner, keeper or possessor had knowledge of the dog’s dangerous propensities, if that person was in fact negligent in failing to prevent foreseeable harm and that negligence resulted in an injury.  If the Defendant knew of dangerous propensities, that knowledge goes to the degree of care required.

Lastly, if the dog was in the custody a temporary caretaker (possessor), as opposed to an owner or keeper, proof of the possessor’s negligent handling of the animal under the circumstances is required.  Under the “temporary caretaker” the only viable theory will be common law negligence.

What you must prove in your case will depend upon what type of action is pled by your attorney.  Under the three potential causes of action here in Michigan for individuals who are injured due to a dog bite, here are the following burdens of proof and/or elements to the claim for your case.

1. Statutory Action.
   1. The Plaintiff was injured and sustained injuries from a dog bite.
   2. The Plaintiff was in a public place lawfully on the property, lawfully on the property of the owner, or lawfully on the property of one in lawful possession.
   3. The biting was about provocation;
   4. The Defendant was the owner of the dog.
2. Common Law Strict Liability Action.
   1. The Plaintiff was injured or sustained damages from a dog bite.
   2. The Plaintiff was on or in a public place, lawfully on the property of the owner or keeper, or lawfully on the property of unlawful possession.
   3. The Defendant was a “owner or keeper” of the dog.
   4. The Defendant knew or should have known of the dog’s dangerous propensities.

1. Common Law Negligence Action.
   1. The Plaintiff was on or in a public place, lawfully on the property of the owner, or lawfully on the property of one in lawful possession.
   2. The owner, keeper or possessor (temporary caretaker) had prior knowledge of a propensity to attack or injure; had the animal long enough to be chargeable with notice of his dangerous habits; or was negligent under the circumstances, that is, breached a duty to the Plaintiff.
   3. The dog attacked or bit the Plaintiff.
   4. Damages were sustained.

The good news for victims of dog bites here in Michigan would include the following:

1. Provocation is the only defense under a statutory claim for damages and is always a fact question for the jury.
2. Comparative negligence does not apply.  An allocation of fault does not apply.
3. Responding or reacting to a dog’s vicious and/or aggressive behavior does not constitute provocation under the dog bite statute.