Dog Bite — No Win No Fee
Dog bite claims in the United States are handled on a contingency fee basis. Liability rules vary by state — approximately 29 states impose strict liability on dog owners, while others follow the one-bite rule or negligence standards.
What Is the Difference Between Strict Liability and the One-Bite Rule?
Direct Answer: About 36 states impose strict liability — the owner is liable for bite injuries regardless of the dog's history. The remaining states follow the one-bite rule, where the owner is only liable if they knew (or should have known) the dog was dangerous. Dog bite attorneys work on contingency.
Strict liability states hold dog owners liable for bite injuries regardless of whether the owner knew the dog was dangerous. The victim only needs to prove they were bitten and suffered damages.
One-bite rule states require the victim to prove the owner knew or should have known of the dog's dangerous propensity. The name is somewhat misleading — it does not literally give every dog one free bite. Evidence of prior aggressive behaviour, growling, or lunging can establish knowledge.
Insurance Coverage
Dog bite claims are typically covered under the dog owner's homeowner's or renter's insurance policy. Liability coverage generally ranges from $100,000 to $300,000. Some insurers exclude specific breeds considered high-risk. The Insurance Information Institute reports that dog bite claims account for over one-third of all homeowner's liability claims.
Common Injuries
- Puncture wounds and lacerations
- Infection (including rabies risk)
- Facial and hand injuries
- Scarring and disfigurement
- Nerve damage
- Emotional trauma and PTSD (especially in children)
Frequently Asked Questions
You May Also Be Interested In
Where this applies: Contingency fee rules are set state by state. Check your own state's rules before acting.
Sources for this page
Every rule stated above is based on the primary sources below. Each link goes to the legislation, court rule or regulator itself so you can check it. Last verified 2 August 2026.
- ABA Model Rule 1.5 (Fees)
Model, not law. Each state adopts its own version. Rule 1.5(d) bars contingency fees in most domestic relations matters and in criminal defence.
- Cornell LII — contingency fee
- Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 54(d) (costs to the prevailing party)
A losing plaintiff may be ordered to pay the defendant's taxable costs. There is no US equivalent of QOCS.
Who wrote and checked this page
- Written and published by
- Edward & Amaury Solicitors (Edward & Amaury Ltd, company no. 12195443), regulated by the Solicitors Regulation Authority under no. 800525.
- Legal review
- This page has not yet been through independent legal review. It is written from the primary sources listed below, which you can check directly.
- Review dates
- Last reviewed 2 August 2026. Next review due 2 February 2027.
Fee rules change. California’s medical malpractice fee limits changed on 1 January 2023, and the QOCS rules in England and Wales changed on 6 April 2023. If you spot something out of date, tell us — we publish corrections.