Created: Posted on by
Last updated: June 4, 2018

Pit Bull Attack Victims May Have New Hope to Recover from Landlords After Maulings

DogsBite.org files amicus brief in landmark appeals case that hopes to expand liability out to landlords when a tenant's pit bull attacks. Personal injury attorneys may soon have a new argument in their tool chest and landlords may have new concerns.

Austin, TX January 16, 2012 -- DogsBite.org, a national dog bite victims' group dedicated to reducing serious dog attacks, announces amicus brief filing in Solesky v. Tracey, recently argued in the Court of Appeals of Maryland. The case involves the parents of a young boy seeking damages for injuries inflicted by a pit bull owned by a landlord's tenant. Using a new legal theory, the plaintiff hopes to uphold that landlords may be liable when a tenant's pit bull attacks a person.

The amicus brief, which literally is, a "friend of the court" was filed due to DogsBite.org's strong interest in this subject matter, the protection of pit bull attack victims in circumstances when a renter is "judgment proof," has no means to pay the medical bills of the victim, has insufficient coverage or was refused coverage by his or her insurance carrier due to owning this type of dog breed. In the case of Solesky v. Tracey, the claims against the dog's owners were discharged in bankruptcy.

See: Full news release.

Related articles:
06/16/11: Website Launch: Pit Bull Attacks - The Survivors | Pitbullattacks.org
01/31/11: Parent of Mauling Victim Responds to North Carolina Pit Bull Fatality
03/10/10: Dangerous By Default: Extreme Breeds by Anthony Solesky
10/28/09: In Massachusetts, Landlords May Be Liable When Tenant's Pit Bull Attacks

Please donate to support our work

DogsBite.org is a 501(c)(3) tax-exempt public charity organization. Learn more »
Subscribe to our email list today »

6 thoughts on “Pit Bull Attack Victims May Have New Hope to Recover from Landlords After Maulings”

Please review our comment policy.

  1. It is monstrously unfair, but I believe that this is how the fight for BSL will be won: case by case, town by town. I resent it tremendously that victims have to PAY and fight tooth and nail for every smidgen of justice they get–just thinking about a years-long court battle with some willfully defiant pit nutter makes me depressed and exhausted–but I cannot identify any other means of policy change at this time. What a slog, though…

    The good news is that this fight is totally winnable. As long as the lawsuits keep coming, I cannot see a future where pit bulls are legal and/or unregulated. Not everywhere, unfortunately–our Federalist system of government will ensure variation in BSL policy across regions/local gov'ts.

    Pit Bull advocates have two crutches to stand on: property rights, and our culture's tremendous affection for dogs.

    The first is increasingly subject to regulation, with general approval.

    The second one is (ironically) more difficult. Dogs are cherished. Many people are unwilling to grasp the concept of a "bad dog." Lord knows that I didn't think dangerous dogs existed until a few years ago. It seemed like an oxymoron to me.

    When I approached this as an issue of public health, the data convinced me very quickly.

    The suffering that these dogs cause is incalculable. I urge all victims to speak about it, if they can. No policymaker with any conscience can deny their stories.

  5. This would be good news for me as I live across from a rental house with 3 pitbulls. I know the family doesn't have anything to sue for and I would have no recovery possiblities if the landlord was not held liable.

  6. This is a very important issue as Pit Bull rescues are targetting the under 25 age group who are most likley to be renters. The least likely to have proper containment infrastructures and insurance!

    The Criminal negligence continues….

Comments are closed.