Grand Rapids Dog Bite Lawyer

Bitten by a dog? Michigan law puts the burden on the owner, but the claim still has to be proved

I am Mitchell Bisson, a Grand Rapids personal injury lawyer. I have litigated for over 15 years. This page explains dog bite claims under Michigan law: who is responsible, what I have to prove, what a dog owner can argue in defense, what a claim can recover and how the deadlines work, including for a child. I prepare every claim as if it will be tried, and I explain the law and the evidence in plain terms. I do not promise outcomes.

The short answer. Under MCL 287.351(1), if a dog bites a person without provocation while the person is on public property or lawfully on private property, the owner of the dog is liable for any damages suffered by the person bitten, regardless of the former viciousness of the dog or the owner’s knowledge of it. The word “any” has been read to include all damages the bitten person suffered. Hill v. Sacka, 256 Mich. App. 443, 451 (2003). The owner can defend by showing provocation or that you were not lawfully on the property, and the claim must be filed on time. Only the owner is liable under the statute. Nothing here predicts how a particular claim will end.

A dog bite can change a life quickly. Wounds, infection, nerve damage and scarring can last long after the bite itself, and children are often the ones hurt. Michigan’s dog bite statute matters because it makes the owner liable without requiring proof that the dog had bitten before or that the owner knew it was dangerous. That narrows what has to be proved, but the facts still decide the claim: who owned the dog, where the bite happened, why you were there and what happened in the moments before.

Many of the questions I get come from people who are not sure whom to blame. The dog may belong to a neighbor, a tenant, a friend or a stranger. The owner may say the dog was provoked, or that you were not supposed to be there. There may be a landlord, a homeowner’s policy or a health plan asking for repayment. This page walks through each of those in the order they usually come up.

What the dog bite law requires, issue by issue

The table sets out the issues that decide most dog bite claims and where each rule comes from.

What I have to prove

Because the statute does not ask whether the owner knew the dog was dangerous, the proof is about four facts:

1. A bite. You were injured when a dog bit you. Medical records, photographs of the wound and the first account you gave to a nurse or doctor are the usual proof.
2. Public property or lawful presence on private property. You were on public property, or you were lawfully on the owner’s private property or someone else’s. A person is lawfully on the owner’s property if the person is there in the performance of a duty imposed by the laws of this state or by United States laws or postal regulations, or as an invitee or licensee of the person lawfully in possession, unless the person gained entry to commit an unlawful or criminal act. MCL 287.351(2).
3. No provocation. The bite was not provoked. I prepare the evidence of what you and the dog were doing before the bite.
4. The defendant owned the dog. The defendant owned the dog at the time. I look for license records, vaccination records, veterinary records, adoption papers, social media posts and statements by neighbors.

Then I prove damages: the economic and noneconomic harm the bite caused. The statute does not require proof that the dog had been aggressive before, and an owner’s statement that the dog never bit anyone is not a defense to the statutory claim.

The statute speaks of a dog that bites. If you were hurt by a dog without being bitten, for example if a dog knocked you down, the statutory claim may not fit. I then look at negligence and common law theories, which have different proof requirements.

Provocation: the main defense

Provocation is the defense I expect in most contested dog bite cases. The owner says you, or someone with you, did something that caused the dog to bite. The Court of Appeals has said that an unintentional act can be provocation, because the focus is on the nature of the act and its relationship to the outcome, not on the actor’s intent. Koivisto v. Davis, 277 Mich. App. 492, 496 (2008). The same court held that reacting to a dog that is already attacking is not provocation. Koivisto v. Davis, 277 Mich. App. 492, 497-499 (2008). That distinction matters in practice: what a person did in the moments before the bite and what the dog was already doing are the two questions.

Because provocation is decided by what happened, the evidence matters more than the argument. I look for witnesses, video from doorbell and security cameras, the position of the people and the dog, and any prior contact. If you are a child, or you are a person who was hurt while helping someone else, those facts are part of the account. I do not guess at what a jury will decide.

Two related issues come up. First, a person who was knowingly trespassing is outside the statutory claim because the statute covers public property and lawful presence on private property. Second, the Dangerous Animals Act excludes from its definition of a dangerous animal an animal that bites a person who is knowingly trespassing on the owner’s property or who provokes or torments the animal. MCL 287.321(a). That act is separate from a claim for damages, and I treat it as a separate track.

Who can be sued: owners, landlords and people watching the dog

The statute makes the owner liable. The Court of Appeals has read that language to mean that statutory liability for dog bites attaches only to owners, and it held that a landlord who was not the owner owed no duty to protect third parties from an attack by a tenant’s dog away from the leased premises where the dog was acquired after the lease began. Feister v. Bosack, 198 Mich. App. 19, 20-22, 24-26 (1993). The same opinion rejected the idea that a landlord’s power to evict gives the landlord control over the tenant’s dog. One judge concurred only in the result.

Outside the statute, the common law is narrower. The Michigan Supreme Court has described common law strict liability for a domestic animal as requiring a possessor, meaning an owner or keeper, who knows or has reason to know of the animal’s dangerous propensities. A keeper must have proprietary control akin to ownership. Trager v. Thor, 445 Mich. 95, 99-102 (1994). A person who is only looking after a dog for a short time is not an owner or keeper, but can face a negligence claim if the dog was ineffectively controlled in a situation where injury could reasonably be expected, judged by the total situation, including the dog’s past behavior. Trager v. Thor, 445 Mich. 95, 103-107 (1994).

The Dangerous Animals Act, a separate statute, defines owner as a person who owns or harbors a dog, but that definition is given for that act. MCL 287.321(c). None of the cases I read for this page carries that wider definition into the dog bite statute, so I treat who owned the dog as a fact to prove and I name the likely defendants only after I know the facts.

When a dog has more than one person around it, such as a dog walker, a house sitter, a family friend or a landlord who lives next door, I look at who owned the dog, who kept it and who controlled it at the time. A landlord who owns neither the dog nor the leash is the hardest defendant, and I tell clients that plainly.

Negligence and comparative fault

Comparative fault works differently in the two kinds of claim. For the statutory dog bite claim, the Court of Appeals held that the comparative fault allocation statutes do not apply. Hill v. Sacka, 256 Mich. App. 443, 449-451, 462 (2003). For a negligence claim against an owner, a handler or anyone else, damages are reduced by the injured person’s percentage of fault, and if that percentage is greater than the aggregate fault of the others, noneconomic damages are not awarded. MCL 600.2959. A person’s contributory fault does not bar the recovery of damages in those claims, subject to that section. MCL 600.2958.

For that reason I plead the statutory claim and, where the facts support it, a negligence or common law claim in the alternative. Which one matters depends on who owned the dog, where it happened and whether the owner has a provocation argument.

What a dog bite claim can recover

The statute makes the owner liable for “any damages suffered by the person bitten,” and the Court of Appeals said that “any” means every and all, so liability under the statute extends to all damages the bitten person suffered. Hill v. Sacka, 256 Mich. App. 443, 451 (2003). In that case a two year old was bitten and mauled, needed surgery on three areas of his head and face and was left with significant scarring, and the jury returned damages for past and future noneconomic loss. Hill v. Sacka, 256 Mich. App. 443, 444-446, 461 (2003). The text of the section sets no dollar cap on damages.

A verdict in a personal injury action must separately find past economic and noneconomic damages and future damages by type, including medical and other costs of health care, lost wages or earnings or lost earning capacity and other economic loss, and noneconomic loss. MCL 600.6305(1). In a dog bite case, that translates to:

• Medical expenses, past and future: emergency care, wound repair, antibiotics, rabies protocols where they apply, surgery, scar revision and follow-up care.
• Lost earnings and earning capacity if the injury kept you off work or limited the work you can do.
• Noneconomic loss: pain, fright, embarrassment from scarring or disfigurement and the effect of the injury on daily life and enjoyment.
• Other expenses that the injury caused, supported by receipts and records.

Each category has to be proved with evidence. In Hill the jury found that the father had no economic damages and that the child had past and future noneconomic damages, which shows that each category of damages is decided separately on the evidence. Hill v. Sacka, 256 Mich. App. 443, 446 (2003). Medical records and bills, wage records, photographs over time and a record of how the injury changed daily life are what turn these categories into evidence.

Insurance and getting paid

Nothing in the dog bite statute depends on insurance. The statute makes the owner liable, and it does not require the owner to carry a policy. Whether an insurer must pay is a separate contract question, and Michigan courts apply unambiguous insurance contract provisions as written unless they violate law or a traditional contract defense applies. Rory v. Continental Ins. Co., 473 Mich. 457, 461 (2005). So the limits, definitions and exclusions of the owner’s homeowner’s or renter’s policy decide whether coverage responds. I do not assume that any particular policy covers or excludes dog claims.

Before a lawsuit is filed, I ask for the owner’s insurance information and report the claim promptly, but I cannot count on the owner to produce the policy. Once a lawsuit is filed, a party may obtain discovery of the existence and contents of an insurance agreement under which an insurer may be liable to satisfy part or all of a judgment. MCR 2.302(B)(2). A party must also provide a copy of the pertinent portions of any such agreement as part of initial disclosures, although an action in district court is exempt from the initial disclosure requirement. MCR 2.302(A)(1)(g), (A)(4)(b).

If the owner has no policy, or the policy does not respond, the statutory liability is still the owner’s. A judgment would be against the owner, so collecting it depends on the owner’s assets. A court that finds an animal to be a dangerous animal that has not caused serious injury or death may order the owner to maintain liability insurance, but that order looks forward to protect the public and is not a source of payment for an earlier bite. MCL 287.322(4), (5)(d).

If your health plan paid the medical bills, it may claim repayment. In one dog bite case tried to verdict, the plaintiff’s health insurer intervened to enforce its subrogation rights for medical expenses. Hill v. Sacka, 256 Mich. App. 443, 445 n 1 (2003). The plan documents decide what that insurer can recover, and I read them before I discuss a settlement figure with you.

Children and dog bites: deadlines and who owns which claim

For an action to recover damages for injury to a person, the period of limitations is three years after the time of the injury unless the statute says otherwise. MCL 600.5805(2). A claim accrues when the wrong on which it is based was done, regardless of when damage results. MCL 600.5827. For a bite, the working date is the day of the bite, not the day a scar or nerve problem becomes clear.

A child’s own claim has extra time. If the person first entitled to bring the action is under 18 at the time the claim accrues, that person has one year after the disability is removed to bring the action even though the period of limitations has run, and the infancy must exist when the claim accrues. MCL 600.5851(1), (3). Read together with the general period, the child’s own deadline is the later of three years from the bite or one year after the 18th birthday.

A parent’s claim is a separate matter. Section 5851 speaks of the person first entitled to bring the action who is under 18, and a child and a parent can hold separate claims arising from the same bite. In Hill, the child’s claim was for his own noneconomic damages, while the father’s separate request for economic damages concerned the child’s medical expenses. Hill v. Sacka, 256 Mich. App. 443, 445-446 & n 1 (2003). A parent who paid medical bills should not assume the child’s extra year applies to the parent’s own claim, and I treat three years from the bite as the deadline for it.

One shorter period exists. An action charging assault, battery or false imprisonment has a two year period. MCL 600.5805(3). If the facts include a person deliberately setting a dog on someone, a claim could be framed that way, and I would calendar the earlier date. Evidence also fades well before any deadline: wounds heal, witnesses move and the owner’s insurer may close its own file. I get the facts down early.

Right after a bite: what the law requires of the other person, and what I suggest you do

Get medical care first. It protects your health, and the records also prove the injury.

Michigan law requires the person in charge of the dog to cooperate at the scene. If a person 18 or older is responsible for controlling a dog and knows or has reason to know that it has bitten another person, that person must immediately give the bitten person his or her name and address, the name and address of the dog’s owner if someone else owns it, and, if known, whether the dog is current on legally required vaccinations. MCL 750.66(1). The same person must remain at the scene until those requirements are fulfilled. MCL 750.66a(1). A violation of either section is a misdemeanor punishable by up to 93 days in jail or a fine of up to $500, or both, and neither applies to a bite by a police dog. Writing down what was said and photographing the dog and the location helps if the person leaves.

A report to animal control or police creates a record. The Dangerous Animals Act works through a sworn complaint: on a sworn complaint that an animal is a dangerous animal and has caused serious injury or death to an individual, the district court must issue a summons to the owner to show cause why the animal should not be destroyed, and must order the animal held until a hearing. MCL 287.322(1), (2). Serious injury means permanent, serious disfigurement, serious impairment of health, or serious impairment of a bodily function. MCL 287.321(e). Those proceedings address the animal. They are separate from a claim for damages, and this page does not cover local ordinances.

• Photograph the wound now and again as it heals, and keep the clothing.
• Photograph the dog, the place and any fence, gate or sign.
• Get the owner’s name, address and the dog’s vaccination information, and the names of witnesses.
• Do not give a recorded statement to an insurer before you talk to me, and do not post about the bite online.
• Keep every bill, record and letter in one place.

How I handle a dog bite claim

1. Free consultation. I listen to what happened, ask who owned the dog and tell you what I can and cannot assess from the first facts.
2. Identify the owner and every possible defendant. I confirm who owned, kept and controlled the dog, and whether a landlord, caretaker or another person has any role.
3. Lock down the evidence. I send preservation requests, collect video, witness names, animal control and police records, and photograph the scar as it heals.
4. Find the insurance. I report the claim to the owner’s insurer, ask for the policy and, after a lawsuit is filed, use the discovery rules for insurance agreements.
5. Build the damages. I gather the medical, wage and treatment records and, for a child, the plan for future care.
6. Handle the repayment claims. I read the health plan documents and deal with any subrogation claim before settlement.
7. Negotiate or file suit. I present the claim, explain each offer and what it means after repayments, and file suit within the deadline if the claim cannot be resolved.

What I need from you

• The date, time and place of the bite, and what you and the dog were doing before it happened.
• The owner’s name and address, and anything you know about who else lived at or controlled the property.
• Photographs of the wound, the dog, the place and your clothing, and any video from nearby cameras.
• Your medical providers, dates of treatment and bills, and your health plan information.
• Your employer and pay records for any time missed.
• Any police, animal control or insurance contact you have had, and any letter or form you have been asked to sign.

Where your claim will be heard in Kent County

I represent clients in Grand Rapids, Kentwood, Grandville, Wyoming and across Kent County. Under MCL 600.8301(1), the district court has exclusive jurisdiction in civil actions when the amount in controversy does not exceed $25,000. Kent County district courts include the 61st District Court in Grand Rapids, the 59th in Walker and Grandville, the 62A in Wyoming, the 62B in Kentwood and the 63rd for Rockford, Lowell, Cedar Springs, East Grand Rapids and the surrounding townships. MCL 600.8128a; MCL 600.8130. Larger claims are filed in the Kent County Circuit Court, the 17th Judicial Circuit. MCL 600.518.

Why people hire me for dog bite claims

• I start with who owned the dog, because that decides who can be sued.
• I collect the evidence of provocation and lawful presence early, before video is overwritten and memories fade.
• I look for the insurance and the repayment claims at the start, so you know what a settlement figure means.
• I calendar the deadlines, including the separate ones for a child and for a parent.
• I explain what the law does and does not give you, including when a landlord is not a realistic defendant.
• I do not promise outcomes. I give you the facts, the law and my honest read of the claim, and the decisions are yours.

Related Michigan pages

• Grand Rapids personal injury lawyer
• Premises liability
• Negligence claims
• Comparative fault
• Government claims and notice deadlines
• Negligence
• Michigan legal FAQs

Reviewed by Mitchell S. Bisson, October 28, 2026.

I represent people bitten by dogs in Kent County and West Michigan. Contact me 24/7 by phone or email. Your Rights, My Fight! Call for a free initial consultation.

Big-Firm Power. Street-Level Grit.

Law Offices of Mitchell S. Bisson, 2828 Kraft Ave SE, Suite 295, Grand Rapids, MI 49512, serving Kent County and West Michigan.

MBisson@BissonLegal.com

This page provides general information about Michigan law and is not legal advice. Reading it does not create an attorney-client relationship. Laws change and every case turns on its own facts. Consult a licensed attorney about your specific situation.