The dog bite laws in SC
As in most states, the law in South Carolina narrowly defines the liability of dog owners in both intentional and unintentional incidents involving injuries to other people, and there are very specific situations in which a dog owner can be held liable. Their liability is directly tied to the level of control that dog owners exercise over their dogs. Three broad principles regarding this area of law in South Carolina include:
• Under the first principle, South Carolina dog owners can be held liable for the actions of their dogs under the doctrine of vicarious liability. Under this principle, dog owners are strictly liable for any injuries that arise from their dogs, while at the same time preserving the defendants’ rights to recover against other responsible parties who may have contributed to the plaintiff’s injuries.
• To be held liable under the second principle, a plaintiff must demonstrate that the dog owner either intentionally released their dog with the knowledge that the dog might eventually cause injury to others, or that the dog owner negligently failed to exercise the appropriate level of restraint . A claim under this principle for negligence requires a plaintiff to demonstrate that the defendant’s actions fell below what a reasonable person would have done under the same circumstances. A claim for intentional action requires a plaintiff to show that the defendant knowingly took an affirmative action that placed others at risk of harm.
• The final principle holds owners strictly liable for injuries sustained by people bitten by their dogs only if the owners had prior knowledge of the dog’s propensity to bite or attack others. Under this final principle, an injured person does not need to prove that the dog owner was negligent or intentional in their actions in order to win a claim.
After reviewing these three principles, we can start to examine the specifics of the statutory provisions, judicial rulings and regulations under the South Carolina Code of Laws.
Strict liability and negligence
Another question that arises in dog bite cases is whether strict liability applies. South Carolina applies the strict liability standard in dog bite cases where the facts fall within the narrow confines of the common law rule. That rule has long been that if any domestic animal is injured by an owner or possessor, or goes on another person’s land and injures them, then the person injured has a right of recovery for his injury. This rule has exceptions. For example, if the injured person provoked the animal in any way, or was trespassing when injured, you would most likely not be able to recover under strict liability.
Negligence is a separate legal principle which applies in many South Carolina dog bite cases (and also applies in other injury cases). The essence of the legal concept of negligence is that people are generally required to use "reasonable care" in order to avoid causing injury to others. This means that people have a duty to avoid doing anything that would be reasonably expected to cause injury to someone else. If someone fails to act that way, and someone else is injured as a result, then the injured person can sue the negligent person (the person who failed to use "reasonable care") for compensatory damages.
South Carolina dog owner’s obligations
Dog owners in South Carolina carry legal responsibilities for their pets. South Carolina dog bite laws may hold dog owners liable for serious injury and death in cases where reasonable owner control could have prevented a dog bite from occurring. Dog owners carry a relatively low burden of proof that their animal did not cause the dog bite injury. A victim who is bitten by an animal can recover damages, even if the event was accidental.
The law places certain restrictions on dog owners for their pet control measures. For example, dog owners are required to restrain their animals to prevent them from causing injury to either a human or animal. This applies to any animals or livestock the dog may encounter. Owners may not allow their dogs to run at large or to roam uncontrolled in public areas.
There are other limitations. Some communities have dog ordinances that are even more restrictive, applying to all breeds. Georgia law allows law enforcement to pick up stray dogs they find running at large within the state. These dogs may be sent to a shelter or pound. If a stray dog is picked up by law enforcement and left at a shelter or pound, the dog may be held for ten days. After 10 days, if the dog is not recovered by its owner, it becomes the property of whoever can pay to adopt or purchase the animal.
Dog owners must adhere to local licensing and registration requirements, which may vary by municipality. Owners may be held liable for their pet damages even if no actual injury occurs. Damage awards may include "other damages", which can be significant. Property damages can be levied against dog owners, as well. The legal process for suing for damages is called a tort.
The above obligations do not apply to dogs that have been certified as guide dogs by another state. Guide dogs have been socialized to the fullest degree possible and can be aggressive if their owners are threatened or injured.
Dog bite legal defenses
Despite the strict liability law in South Carolina, that does not mean that a dog owner will invariably be found liable for a dog bite. List below are some common legal defenses that a dog owner may raise in a dog bite lawsuit:
Provocation: Provocation is a defense to a strict liability dog bite claim. A dog owner may be relieved of liability of the actions of his or her dog if the victim was provoking the dog at the time of the bite. A dog who is provoked to attack by someone voluntarily participating in an activity with the dog, such as teasing, will not subject the dog owner to liability the same way that a dog who attacks a victim who unexpectedly enters the dog’s territory would. Because both the victim and the dog handled themselves according to reasonable expectations, the dog owner should not be held liable. (Note: "Reasonable expectations" addresses what the dog owner would reasonably expect or expect not to see the dog doing. More on that below).
Trespassing Will Not Be A Defense to Animal Attacks in South Carolina: In South Carolina, a trespasser may not recover for injuries caused by an animal owned by a homeowner who has the animal kept on his property for a billable service. However, a trespasser in South Carolina may recover for injuries inflicted by a dog if there was a contract that would have been in favor of the trespasser; generally, the contract must be one that benefits the alleged victim, not some third party.
Landowners May Not Hide Behind the Doctrine of Attractive Nuisance: Some states may offer a legal defense for domestic animal owners for injuries caused to children when an attractive nuisance might be involved. For instance, children may be drawn to a beautiful dog that they play with but are not supervised. Attractive nuisance is a highly misunderstood concept and some states may have a legal doctrine where domestic animals are covered under. South Carolina, however, does not recognize the doctrine of attractive nuisance to protect those owners who might keep dogs on their property to attract naïve children in order to bite them.
What to do after a dog bite attack
If you or a loved one has been bitten by a dog in South Carolina, then there are several steps that you need to take to protect your health and legal rights. In the immediate aftermath of a dog bite, you may be in shock, but doing the following can help protect both your health and potentially allow you to file a claim for damages from the dog owners:
• Get medical attention immediately.
• Exchange information with the dog owner. Include the owner’s full name, contact information, description of the animal, animal license number, proof of current rabies vaccination and vaccination history from a veterinarian. If the dog owner is not readily available, document as much as you can about the owner and the animal itself, including where the dog was located and its general health appearance. If you take pictures, be sure to date them on your phone or camera.
• Report the incident to the local animal control agency if the owner is not available.
• Check to see if your injuries may be covered by medical insurance . Health insurance and some no-fault car insurance policies may cover your treatment costs.
• Collect evidence of the circumstances surrounding the bite. include witness names, contact information and any statements they may have made after the attack.
• Document all communications related to the attack, including statements the animal owner or witnesses made to you.
• Keep records of all medical care and other expenses related to your injuries, including receipts, invoices, and bills. Keep a diary of your ongoing treatment and the ways in which your injuries affect your daily life.
Following the above steps after a dog bite in South Carolina can help protect your legal claim, but it can’t do much for your immediate health concerns. Seek medical care right away. Animal bites have a tendency to become infected, whether it’s a wild animal, a domestic pet, or even your own. In addition, the longer the wait between the incident and medical care, the harder it may be to collect evidence. Do the smart thing and seek medical attention right away.
Compensation available to dog bite victims
The next step after establishing one of the above discussed grounds for liability is to calculate the amount of damages the dog bite victim is entitled to. Generally, the goal of a monetary recovery is to put the victim back where they were immediately before the dog bite incident occurred. This is done by providing the victim with compensation for their medical expenses, wages lost while unable to work because of the incident, and for other damages including pain and suffering, scarring and disfigurement, and mental distress. In calculating the awards for these categories, South Carolina Courts allow juries broad discretion as the level of compensation should be determined by the facts of the case. This situation, of leaving the ultimate determination of damages to a jury, creates potential problems especially where the amount of recovery is being decided in a jurisdiction with a Low Country "good ol’ boy" reputation. A danger in these cases is an overly enthusiastic award in a high profile case that ends up tainting the water for the next dog bite case to come before the Court. That appears to be what happened in a 1998 case where a teen exited a vehicle parked near a pet grooming business and was bitten on the face. The bite left her with lifelong scaring resulting in a jury award against the business owner in excess of $2 million. Nothing has been heard since about any other cases arising in Charleston involving dog bites at commercial establishments. This was doubtlessly in part to the notoriety associated with the Court’s decision in the first case.
Victims of dog bites recover from an owner of a commercial establishment such as a convenience store, restaurant, or bar, can also pursue causes of action against the premises owner for the same causes of action discussed above. The argument on the commercial front is that the animal was created nuisance by the owner by keeping it on the premises. In talking about this scenario, the Columbia, South Carolina Office of the State Attorney General, in a frequently asked questions section on their website, explains "The potential exists for liability on the part of a commercial establishment where a vicious dog, known to be so, is allowed to run loose in the establishment or on the premises." The standard of proof for proving ownership of a vicious animal in this circumstances again would require a showing that the owner knew of the animal’s viciousness by either having prior knowledge of the animal’s history or because of the highly dangerous nature of the animal that the owner should have known of the potential danger.
Hiring a lawyer for dog bite cases
When nursing wounds from a dog attack, your attorney can help with these kinds of legal matters: Since the dog owner and their household may be reluctant to face a lawsuit, your lawyer can act as an intermediary who removes the stress of communication from your experience. A qualified accident attorney with years of experience representing dog bite and personal injury cases in South Carolina and throughout the U.S. can give you access to expert professionals who can help you strengthen your case. The right attorney can also help you with restorative approaches for the victim, looking for solutions and compensation that provide the therapy or counseling the victim needs. There is also the need to know if you have been a target of foul play by the dog owner. A professional attorney will have the insight and experience to determine the appropriate action needed for such a case. It’s vitally important to have legal support when dealing with any sort of liability with dogs, whether it’s aggression, bites or other injuries. With a skilled South Carolina dog bite attorney at your side, all of those issues become stronger, more effective and less stressful for the victim.
Recent SC case examples
Many cases involving dog bites have helped set precedents not just in South Carolina, but all over the country. In addition, new rulings are made every year. Here are a few recent cases in South Carolina that have set legal precedents for dog bite cases or have had significant outcomes:
Robert v. Mathews: A 17-year-old boy was bitten on the mouth by his friend’s rottweiler, suffering severe wounds and requiring 104 stitches. He sued the dog owner for damages. The 17-year-old had entered the property through a space in the fence at the dog owner’s house without permission, but was a family friend of the property owner and the family members let the boy come inside their house.
The dog owner claimed the teen had provoked the dog, which is why the animal attacked him, and that this was the main reason the teen should not receive compensation for his injuries, regardless of the dog’s prior violent history. The dog attacked him because the dog was protecting the house from an intruder, and that the injuries he sustained were his own fault, the dog owner claimed.
The teen’s case went to trial, and the jury returned a verdict for the teen in the amount of $350,000, with the decision vacated because of a lack of evidence to support the amount of emotional distress allegedly suffered by the boy. The final award given to the family was only $300,000, and a new trial was ordered on the issue of whether the amount of the award was sufficient due to the admission of certain evidence. The dog owner requested new trial and costs , but the Supreme Court of South Carolina denied the request.
Kisner v. South Carolina Department of Transportation: An employee of SCDOT injured the right forefinger of his left hand while attempting to free a stuck concrete barrier. While the employee was retrieving the barrier, he was bitten by a dog that had wandered on scene and bit him after it was set free. The injury was severe enough that he had to have his finger amputated.
SCDOT denied the claim, asserting the injury was caused solely as a result of the employee failing to follow safety procedures. The employee appealed the denial of his claim. The court ruled in favor of the employee and ordered compensation for medical expenses.
Ferguson v. Wilkes: A child was bitten on the face by a pit bull. Her injuries were severe enough to require 300 stitches. The dog owner stated that the dog had been provoked by wild animals and not the child and that the injuries were solely a result of his dog’s actions.
A surviving parent of a child wounded by a dog filed a lawsuit for damages under the Dog Owners’ Liability Act. The suit was dismissed by the circuit judge, who found liability did not transfer to the dog owner because the dog was not outside of the owner’s control at the time of the attack. The child had followed the dog into the owner’s house without the owner’s permission, and the dog had bitten the child after retreating back inside the home, according to the owner. However, the Court of Appeals determined the injury was not exempt from liability under the DOLA due to it taking place out of the owner’s control, citing a significant change in the current state of the law.