Restatement (Second) of Torts · Section § 398
This section addresses the liability of an owner of an animal for harm caused by his or her animal under certain conditions.
Source: Restatement Restatement (Second) of Torts § § 398
A possessor of a domestic animal is not liable for harm caused by the animal unless they had reason to know that the animal had a propensity to cause such harm.
This section states that pet owners are generally not responsible for injuries caused by their pets unless they knew the animal was dangerous. Essentially, if an owner understands their domestic animal could behave harmfully and doesn’t take proper precautions, they may be held liable.
The section distinguishes between domestic and wild animals in determining liability.
Possessing an animal carries an implicit responsibility for the owner's knowledge of that animal's behavior.
Illustration 1
If a dog owner knows that their dog has bitten someone before and does not secure it, they may be liable for any subsequent bites.
Illustration 2
An owner of a pet cat would generally not be liable for a scratch as cats are not typically considered dangerous domestic animals.
This case reinforced that an owner must have knowledge of a dangerous propensity in their domestic animals to be held liable.
Understanding § 398 is crucial for attorneys representing clients in animal-related injury cases, particularly in evaluating the owner's knowledge of their pet's behavior. This section also guides pet owners on their potential liabilities and the extent of their responsibilities.