Strict Liability vs. the One-Bite Rule in Maine

By the FigureMyTax Editorial Team · How we calculate

Maine doesn't fit neatly into either box. The rule that governs your claim depends on whether the dog injured you on the owner's property or somewhere else.

Off the owner's premises: strict liability

Under 7 M.R.S. §3961(2), when a dog injures a person who is not on the owner's or keeper's premises at the time, the owner or keeper is liable in a civil action for the amount of the damages. There's no need to prove negligence or that the dog had bitten before — the opposite of a one-bite rule.

On the owner's premises: negligence

Subsection 1 of the same statute governs the rest: an owner or keeper is liable when damage is due to their negligence and wasn't occasioned through the fault of the person injured. If you were on their land, you have to show they failed to use reasonable care — for example, by leaving an aggressive dog unsecured.

How the rule got here

Secondary sources report the off-premises provision was enacted in 2001 by P.L. 2001, c. 220, replacing the one-bite rule for those injuries. If the history matters to your claim, check the session law itself.

Injuries, not just bites

The statute speaks of a dog that injures a person, so injuries such as being knocked down can fall within it when they happen off the owner's or keeper's premises.

This is general information, not legal advice. Which standard applies, and how strong your evidence is under it, depends on the specific facts. Confirm your situation with a licensed Maine attorney.