When an animal attacks someone, the question of who is legally responsible often hinges on more than just what happened in that single moment. A crucial factor in many dog bite and animal attack cases is the animal’s history of aggression, whether the owner knew or should have known that their pet was dangerous.
In Texas and many other states, an animal’s prior behavior can dramatically affect both liability and compensation. Understanding how courts and insurers view an animal’s documented attack history can make all the difference when pursuing justice after a bite or mauling.
Table of Contents
Legal Foundation: What One Bite Rule Really Means
Texas, like several other states, follows what’s commonly known as the one bite rule. Despite its name, it doesn’t give every animal one free bite. Instead, it refers to whether the owner had knowledge of the animal’s dangerous propensities.
If a dog or other animal has previously bitten, attacked, or shown aggression, the owner is on notice that their pet poses a risk. From that moment on, the owner can be held strictly liable for future injuries. This means victims don’t have to prove negligence; they only need to show that the owner knew of the danger and failed to take appropriate precautions.
However, if an animal has no history of aggression, the victim’s case often falls under negligence-based liability. In that situation, the injured person must prove the owner acted unreasonably, such as by failing to secure the animal, violating leash laws, or ignoring warning signs of dangerous behavior.
How Prior Aggressive Behavior Strengthens a Claim
When a dog or animal has a known history of aggression, that record can become powerful evidence of liability. Examples of such history include:
This type of documentation demonstrates foreseeability, meaning the owner should have anticipated the risk and acted responsibly. Once foreseeability is established, it becomes far more difficult for a defendant or insurance company to deny fault.
For instance, if a neighbor warned an owner multiple times that their dog growled or lunged at people, and the owner continued letting the dog roam freely, the victim’s attorney can argue that the owner’s inaction constitutes clear negligence. The owner knew, or reasonably should have known, that the animal was dangerous.
What if the Animal Has No Known History?
When an animal has no prior record of aggression, the legal path becomes more complex but not impossible. In these cases, attorneys often rely on negligence theory rather than strict liability. The focus shifts to the owner’s conduct, not the animal’s history.
To prove negligence, the injured party must show that the owner failed to take reasonable precautions, such as:
Even without a documented bite history, an owner can still be held responsible if their careless behavior directly caused someone’s injury. In other words, “no history” doesn’t mean “no liability.”
However, insurance companies often use the absence of prior aggression as a defense, arguing the owner had no reason to suspect danger. That’s where experienced legal representation becomes critical to counter those claims with evidence of negligence and prove the owner’s duty of care was breached.
How Attorneys Use Prior History in a Case
In investigating an animal attack, skilled personal injury attorneys take several steps to uncover any pattern of aggression. This might include:
When these records reveal a prior attack or aggressive behavior, they can become cornerstone evidence. Combined with witness statements and medical documentation, they strengthen the victim’s claim and help demonstrate the owner’s awareness of the risk.
Role of Insurance in Animal Attack Claims
Most homeowners and renters insurance policies cover dog bite claims. However, insurers may treat cases differently depending on the animal’s prior behavior.
If an animal has a documented history of attacks, the insurance company may try to:
That’s why clear documentation of prior incidents and a timely report to animal control are so important. They establish a record of the owner’s knowledge and prevent insurers from dismissing the case as a “first-time incident.”
Comparative Negligence: When Both Sides Share Responsibility
Texas law follows a modified comparative negligence rule. This means compensation can be reduced if the victim’s own actions contributed to the attack, for example, by provoking the animal, trespassing, or ignoring posted warnings.
However, prior aggression records can counter those defenses. If the animal had attacked before, the owner’s duty to prevent harm becomes even stronger, often outweighing any minor fault attributed to the victim.
For example, if a delivery driver is bitten while placing a package on a porch where a dog previously bit someone, the owner’s awareness of that history would make them overwhelmingly liable, even if the dog was on the property.
Why Documentation Matters So Much
One of the most effective ways to prove that an owner knew of a pet’s dangerous nature is through consistent documentation. Evidence may include:
This documentation not only strengthens a claim but can also lead to higher compensation, since courts and insurers may view the owner’s failure to act as especially reckless.
Broader Impact: Preventing Future Attacks
Holding negligent owners accountable doesn’t just help the victim recover compensation; it also helps protect others. When animal control receives reports of aggression, they can mandate behavioral training, impose leash requirements, or in extreme cases, remove the animal from unsafe environments.
Each claim that highlights an owner’s negligence can prevent future injuries in the community. It reminds owners that pets, especially those with a history of aggression, must be responsibly managed at all times.
What To Do If You’ve Been Attacked
If you’ve suffered injuries from a dog bite or animal attack, take the following steps immediately:
Acting quickly ensures that records, footage, and reports are not lost over time.
Conclusion:
When an animal attack occurs, the truth often lies in its history. Prior complaints, aggressive behavior, or previous bites can mean the difference between a denied claim and a successful recovery.
At Guajardo Injury Law, attorney Mike Guajardo and his team know how to uncover that history. They investigate deeply, working with local authorities and witnesses to build strong, evidence-driven cases for victims of dog bites and animal attacks.
With decades of experience handling premises liability and animal injury cases, Mike Guajardo understands how to prove negligence, hold owners accountable, and pursue the compensation victims deserve.
If you’ve been injured by an aggressive animal, don’t wait. Contact Guajardo Injury Law today to discuss your rights and take the first step toward justice.
