Strict Liability for Bites, Not Chases, in Michigan

By the FigureMyTax Editorial Team · How we calculate

Michigan splits dog injuries in two. A bite gets strict liability. Everything else falls back on the old rules.

For bites: strict liability

MCL 287.351 makes the owner liable for any damages suffered by a person bitten without provocation on public property or lawfully on private property, regardless of the dog's former viciousness or the owner's knowledge. No prior bite, no negligence.

For everything else: the common law

The statute is about bites. If a dog chases you or knocks you down and you are hurt without a bite, you rely on common-law negligence or strict liability. In one reported case, a plaintiff withdrew the statutory claim because there was no bite, and the common-law claims failed for lack of evidence that the owner knew the dog would not only bark but charge.

What the common law demands

Common-law strict liability requires proof that the owner or keeper knew of the dog's vicious nature — the old one-bite logic. A negligence claim turns on what the owner knew or should have known about the dog's aggressive tendencies, which sets the care required.

Plead both

Because Michigan courts treat the common law as preserved alongside the statute, a careful claim can rest on several theories at once. In a bite case the statute is the strongest; in a chase or knockdown, evidence of the owner's prior knowledge is what decides it.

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