Colorado
Colorado Dog Bite Laws: Liability and Victim Rights
Independently fact-checked against primary sources (last audited August 23, 2026). · Reviewed by the RecordingLaw editorial team. · Law checked current as of August 23, 2026. · 7 primary sources cited on this page. How we verify our legal content

Colorado splits dog bite liability into two tracks under C.R.S. 13-21-124. Owners face strict liability for bites causing serious bodily injury or death, covering economic damages without proof of prior dangerous behavior. For less severe injuries, victims must prove negligence under the common-law standard.
Estimate your claim: Use our free Colorado Dog Bite Settlement Calculator to see a rough settlement range based on the medical bills, the bite location, the victim's age, and Colorado's liability rule.
How Colorado Dog Bite Liability Works
Colorado uses a dual-track system for dog bite claims. The type of legal claim you can bring depends on the severity of the injury.
Under C.R.S. 13-21-124, a person who suffers serious bodily injury or death from a dog bite while lawfully on public or private property may recover economic damages from the dog owner. The owner is liable regardless of the dog's history or whether the owner knew the dog was dangerous. This is known as strict liability.
For injuries that do not meet the "serious bodily injury" threshold, Colorado applies a common-law negligence standard. The victim must show that the owner knew or should have known the dog was dangerous and failed to take reasonable steps to prevent the bite.
This distinction matters because each track offers different types of compensation and requires different levels of proof.
What Qualifies as "Serious Bodily Injury"
The statute defines "serious bodily injury" by reference to C.R.S. 18-1-901(3)(p). It includes injuries that involve:
- A substantial risk of death
- A substantial risk of serious permanent disfigurement
- A substantial risk of protracted loss or impairment of function of any body part or organ
- Broken bones or fractures
- Second- or third-degree burns
The statute also defines "bodily injury" (a lower threshold) as physical injury resulting in severe bruising, muscle tears, or skin lacerations requiring professional medical treatment, or any physical injury requiring corrective or cosmetic surgery.
What Victims Must Prove Under Strict Liability
Under the strict liability track, the burden of proof is relatively straightforward. The victim must show:
- The defendant owned the dog
- The dog bit the victim
- The bite caused serious bodily injury or death
- The victim was lawfully on public or private property at the time
The victim does not need to show the owner was careless, that the dog had bitten before, or that the owner knew the dog was aggressive.
Strict Liability Covers Only Economic Damages
One critical limitation of C.R.S. 13-21-124 is that it only allows recovery of economic damages. These include:
| Economic Damage Type | Examples |
|---|---|
| Medical expenses | Emergency room visits, surgery, rehabilitation, future treatment |
| Lost wages | Time missed from work during recovery |
| Loss of earning capacity | Reduced ability to earn income long-term |
| Property damage | Damaged clothing, personal items, or other property |
| Out-of-pocket costs | Transportation to medical appointments, home care assistance |
To recover non-economic damages such as pain and suffering, emotional distress, scarring, disfigurement, or loss of enjoyment of life, the victim must file a separate negligence claim and prove that the dog owner failed to exercise reasonable care.
Exceptions to Dog Owner Liability
C.R.S. 13-21-124 lists several specific exceptions where a dog owner is not liable, even if the bite causes serious injury. The owner is not liable when:

- The victim was trespassing. The person was unlawfully on public or private property at the time of the bite.
- The property had posted warning signs. The bite occurred on the dog owner's property and the property was clearly and conspicuously marked with "no trespassing" or "beware of dog" signs.
- The dog was used by law enforcement or military. A peace officer or military personnel was using the dog in the performance of official duties.
- The victim provoked the dog. The person knowingly provoked the dog before the bite occurred.
- The victim was an animal professional. The person was a veterinary health-care worker, dog groomer, humane agency staff person, professional dog handler, trainer, or dog show judge acting in the course of their duties.
- The dog was a working dog. The dog was working as a hunting dog, herding dog, farm or ranch dog, or predator control dog on the property of or under the control of the dog's owner.
These exceptions apply to the strict liability statute specifically. A victim barred from a strict liability claim may still pursue a negligence claim in some situations.
Colorado's Modified Comparative Negligence Rule
Colorado follows a modified comparative negligence system under C.R.S. 13-21-111. This rule affects how much compensation a dog bite victim can recover if the victim was partially at fault.

Under this rule:
- If the victim is 0% to 49% at fault, they can still recover damages, but the award is reduced by their percentage of fault
- If the victim is 50% or more at fault, they are completely barred from recovery
For example, if a jury awards $100,000 in damages but finds the victim 30% at fault for provoking the dog, the victim would receive $70,000.
This rule applies in negligence-based dog bite claims. It may also be raised as a defense in strict liability claims where the victim's conduct contributed to the injury.
Dangerous Dog Laws and Criminal Penalties
Colorado's criminal statute on dangerous dogs, C.R.S. 18-9-204.5, imposes penalties on owners of dogs that injure or kill people or domestic animals. The penalties escalate based on the severity of the harm.
Definition of "Dangerous Dog"
Under the statute, a "dangerous dog" is one that has:
- Inflicted bodily or serious bodily injury upon or caused the death of a person or domestic animal
- Demonstrated tendencies that would cause a reasonable person to believe the dog may inflict injury upon or cause the death of any person or domestic animal
- Been trained for or engaged in animal fighting
Criminal Penalties by Severity
| Offense | Classification | Potential Penalties |
|---|---|---|
| Dog causes bodily injury to a person | Class 2 misdemeanor | Up to 120 days in jail, a fine of up to $750, or both |
| Dog causes serious bodily injury (first offense) | Class 1 misdemeanor | Up to 364 days in jail, a fine of up to $1,000, or both |
| Dog causes serious bodily injury (second+ offense) | Class 6 felony | 1 to 1.5 years in prison, $1,000 to $100,000 fine |
| Dog causes death of a person | Class 5 felony | 1 to 3 years in prison, $1,000 to $100,000 fine |
The misdemeanor maximums come from C.R.S. 18-1.3-501(1)(a.5), which governs offenses committed on or after March 1, 2022. Jail time is on the table for a first offense, not just a fine.
Mandatory Dog Destruction
Upon conviction for a violation resulting in serious bodily injury or death to a person, or death to a domestic animal, or for a second or subsequent violation involving the same dog, the court must order the dangerous dog to be confiscated and destroyed by euthanasia administered by a licensed veterinarian.
Court-Ordered Requirements After a Conviction
These conditions are not automatic duties that attach to any dog someone labels dangerous. Under C.R.S. 18-9-204.5(3)(e.5), a court must impose them on an owner who has been convicted of violating the dangerous dog statute:
- Confine the dog in a building or enclosure designed to be escape-proof, and keep it under the owner's control on a leash whenever it is outside that building or enclosure
- Post a conspicuous warning sign on the building or enclosure notifying others that a dangerous dog is housed there
- Muzzle the dog whenever it is outside the building or enclosure, but only if the conviction is for a second or subsequent offense
- Report any material change in the dog's situation, including a transfer of ownership, a change of address, an escape, or the dog's death, in writing to the state bureau of animal protection
- Permanently identify the dog with a microchip at the owner's expense, and pay a nonrefundable $50 dangerous dog microchip license fee to the bureau
- Disclose the conviction in writing to a veterinarian, groomer, trainer, or other provider before the dog receives service or treatment
- Disclose the conviction in writing to a prospective owner before transferring the dog
The state statute sets no liability insurance requirement for dangerous dog owners. Local ordinances vary, so check with your city or county animal control authority for any additional obligations.
Statute of Limitations for Dog Bite Claims
Under C.R.S. 13-80-102, the statute of limitations for personal injury claims in Colorado is 2 years from the date of the injury. This deadline applies to both strict liability and negligence-based dog bite claims.

Key points about the filing deadline:
- The 2-year clock starts on the date the bite occurs
- Minors may have an extended deadline; the statute of limitations is typically tolled (paused) until the minor turns 18
- Claims against government entities (such as a city-owned dog at an animal shelter) have shorter notice requirements, often as short as 182 days
- Missing the deadline permanently bars the claim in almost all cases
Property damage connected to a dog attack, such as destroyed clothing or the loss of another animal, is also a tort claim, so it carries the same 2-year deadline under C.R.S. 13-80-102. The separate 3-year period in C.R.S. 13-80-101 applies to a closed list of claims that includes contract, fraud, and conversion actions and tort claims arising out of the use or operation of a motor vehicle. Dog bite claims are not on that list.
Dog Owner Responsibilities in Colorado
Colorado dog owners must follow several legal obligations at both the state and local level.
State-Level Requirements
- Rabies vaccination is required by Colorado law for all dogs
- Dangerous dog conditions under C.R.S. 18-9-204.5 follow a conviction: the court orders escape-proof confinement, leashing whenever the dog is outside the enclosure, a warning sign, and microchipping, and adds muzzling on a second or subsequent offense
- Liability for damages under C.R.S. 13-21-124 applies statewide
Local Ordinances
Most Colorado cities and counties have additional requirements, which often include:
- Leash laws requiring dogs to be leashed in public areas
- Licensing and registration with the local animal control authority
- Confinement requirements preventing dogs from running at large
- Noise ordinances addressing excessive barking
Violating local ordinances can strengthen a victim's negligence claim and may result in fines or other penalties for the owner.
Landlord Liability for Dog Bites
Colorado landlords can be held liable for a tenant's dog bite under the premises liability statute, C.R.S. 13-21-115, but only in limited circumstances.
Under the standard established by Colorado courts, a landlord is liable only if:
- The landlord actually knew, before entering into the lease, that the tenant's dog was dangerous
- The landlord had the ability to remove the dog or refuse the tenancy
- The landlord failed to act on that knowledge
Simply knowing the breed, agreeing to allow a "Beware of Dog" sign, or observing the dog on the property is not sufficient to establish landlord liability. The landlord must have had specific knowledge of dangerous behavior, such as a prior bite, before signing the lease.
Once a landlord learns a tenant's dog has bitten someone or shown vicious tendencies, the landlord must take action to remove the dog or risk liability for future incidents.
Breed-Specific Legislation in Colorado
Colorado has no statewide breed-specific legislation (BSL). Whether certain breeds are restricted depends on the local municipality.
Denver's Pit Bull Rules
Denver voters repealed a 30-year ban on pit bulls in November 2020 through Ballot Measure 2J. Pit bulls are now legal in Denver with a breed-restricted permit. Owners must:
- Obtain a breed assessment from Denver Animal Protection
- Register and pay an annual $30 fee
- Limit ownership to two pit bulls per household
- Provide the dog's address, a current photo, and two emergency contacts
Aurora's Repeal
Aurora voters repealed their pit bull ban in November 2024, ending a restriction that had been in place since 2005. Approximately 56% of voters approved the repeal.
Statewide Trend
Several Colorado communities, including Commerce City and Lone Tree, have also dropped breed-specific bans in recent years in favor of behavior-based dangerous dog laws that focus on individual dog conduct rather than breed.
Steps to Take After a Dog Bite in Colorado
If a dog bites you in Colorado, taking the right steps immediately can protect your health and strengthen a potential legal claim.
-
Get medical treatment right away. Dog bites carry a high risk of infection and may cause injuries that worsen without prompt care. Keep all medical records and receipts.
-
Report the bite to animal control. Contact your local animal control agency and, if appropriate, local police. An official report creates a record of the incident.
-
Document the scene and your injuries. Take photographs of your injuries, the location where the bite occurred, and the dog if possible.
-
Collect the owner's information. Get the dog owner's name, address, phone number, and homeowner's or renter's insurance information.
-
Identify witnesses. If anyone saw the attack, collect their names and contact information.
-
Preserve physical evidence. Keep torn or bloody clothing and any other damaged items.
-
Contact a personal injury attorney. A lawyer experienced in Colorado dog bite cases can evaluate whether you have a strict liability claim, a negligence claim, or both, and guide you through the process.
More Colorado Laws
Frequently Asked Questions
Does Colorado follow a one-bite rule for dog bites?
No. Colorado does not follow the one-bite rule. Under C.R.S. 13-21-124, dog owners face strict liability for bites causing serious bodily injury or death, regardless of whether the dog has bitten anyone before. For non-serious injuries, a victim can still sue under a negligence theory if the owner failed to take reasonable precautions.
Can I recover pain and suffering damages after a dog bite in Colorado?
Not under the strict liability statute alone. C.R.S. 13-21-124 only allows recovery of economic damages like medical bills and lost wages. To recover non-economic damages such as pain and suffering, emotional distress, or scarring, you must file a separate negligence claim and prove the owner failed to exercise reasonable care.
How long do I have to file a dog bite lawsuit in Colorado?
You have 2 years from the date of the bite to file a personal injury lawsuit under C.R.S. 13-80-102. For claims against government entities, the notice period may be as short as 182 days. Property damage from the same incident is also a tort claim, so it carries the same 2-year deadline under C.R.S. 13-80-102.
What happens to a dog that bites someone in Colorado?
It depends on the severity of the injury. If the dog causes serious bodily injury or death to a person, or if it is a second or subsequent offense involving the same dog, a court must order the dog confiscated and destroyed by euthanasia under C.R.S. 18-9-204.5. For less severe incidents, the court can order the convicted owner to keep the dog in an escape-proof enclosure, leashed whenever it is outside, and microchipped, with muzzling required only on a second or subsequent offense.
Are pit bulls banned in Colorado?
There is no statewide ban on pit bulls in Colorado. Denver repealed its 30-year pit bull ban in 2020, though owners must obtain a breed-restricted permit. Aurora repealed its pit bull ban in November 2024. Several other Colorado cities have also moved away from breed-specific bans in favor of behavior-based dangerous dog laws.
Injured in Colorado? Get a free case review from a personal-injury attorney
If someone else's negligence caused your injury, you may be owed compensation for medical bills, lost wages, and pain and suffering. Get a free, no-obligation review from a Colorado personal-injury attorney. Most work on contingency, so there is no upfront cost.
Updates
Corrected the filing deadline for dog-related property damage claims to 2 years, added the jail exposure Colorado law allows for the misdemeanor dangerous dog offenses, and rewrote the dangerous dog requirements to reflect that a court imposes them after a conviction, that muzzling applies only to a second or subsequent offense, and that state law imposes no liability insurance requirement.
Independently fact-checked against the cited primary sources; governing law re-checked for recent changes
Governing law re-checked for recent changes
Reviewed and approved by an editor
The Law Behind This Article
This article rests on the statutory provisions below, held in our own legal record and retrieved from the official source. Tap a section to read the operative text.
Colorado Revised Statutes, Title 13: Courts and Court Procedure
§ 13-21-124Civil actions against dog ownersIn force
(1) As used in this section, unless the context otherwise requires: (a) Bodily injury means any physical injury that results in severe bruising, muscle tears, or skin lacerations requiring professional medical treatment or any physical injury that requires corrective or cosmetic surgery. (b) Dog means any domesticated animal related to the fox, wolf, coyote, or jackal. (c) Dog owner means a person, firm, corporation, or organization owning, possessing, harboring, keeping, having financial or property interest in, or having control or custody of, a dog. (d) Serious bodily injury has the same meaning as set forth in section 18-1-901 (3)(p), C.R.S. (2) A person or a personal representative of a person who suffers serious bodily injury or death from being bitten by a dog while lawfully on public or private property shall be entitled to bring a civil action to recover economic damages against the dog owner regardless of the viciousness or dangerous propensities of the dog or the dog owner's knowledge or lack of knowledge of the dog's viciousness or dangerous propensities.
Official text (excerpt) · last checked 2026-08-28 · Read the full text in our law library · Verify at olls.info
Cited in 1 court opinions in our collectionLatest citing opinion in our collection: 2015
Opinions citing this section in our collection:
- David v. Sirius Computer Solutions, Inc. (Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit 2015, 779 F.3d 1209)“…tion, the legislature employed the term “physical injury.” Colo. Rev. Stat. § 13-21-124. In several statutory provisions it use…”
Identified automatically from the court opinions citing this section — not a ranking of which case controls.
§ 13-80-102General limitation of actions - two yearsIn forcecited in 3 of our articles
(1) The following civil actions, regardless of the theory upon which suit is brought, or against whom suit is brought, must be commenced within two years after the cause of action accrues, and not thereafter: (a) Tort actions, including but not limited to actions for negligence, trespass, malicious abuse of process, malicious prosecution, outrageous conduct, interference with relationships, and tortious breach of contract; except that this paragraph (a) does not apply to any tort action arising out of the use or operation of a motor vehicle as set forth in section 13-80-101 (1)(n); (b) All actions for strict liability, absolute liability, or failure to instruct or warn; (c) All actions, regardless of the theory asserted, against any veterinarian; (d) All actions for wrongful death, except as described in subsection (2) of this section; (e) Repealed.
Official text (excerpt) · last checked 2026-09-08 · Read the full text in our law library · Verify at olls.info
Cited in 214 court opinions in our collectionLatest citing opinion in our collection: 2026
Opinions citing this section in our collection:
- Bad Boys of Cripple Creek Mining Co. v. City of Cripple Creek (Colorado Court of Appeals 2000, 2000 Colo. J. C.A.R. 892)“…claim is barred by the applicable statute of limitations, C.R.S. 13-80-102(l)(h) and (i). 2. The Court find…”
- Workman v. Jordan (Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit 1994, 32 F.3d 475)“…lorado’s two-year limitations period applies to this claim. Colo. Rev.Stat. § 13-80-102 (1987). 5 Section 1983 claims accrue w…”
- McKay v. Hammock (Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit 1984, 730 F.2d 1367)“…s is the one-year period for false imprisonment provided by Colo.Rev.Stat. § 13-80-102 (1973), and that this period was extend…”
Identified automatically from the court opinions citing this section — not a ranking of which case controls.
Also relied on in: Colorado Statute of Limitations: Filing Deadlines by Case Type, Colorado Slip and Fall Laws: Proving Premises Liability Under the PLA
§ 13-21-111Negligence cases - comparative negligence as measure of damagesIn forcecited in 6 of our articles
(1) Contributory negligence shall not bar recovery in any action by any person or his legal representative to recover damages for negligence resulting in death or in injury to person or property, if such negligence was not as great as the negligence of the person against whom recovery is sought, but any damages allowed shall be diminished in proportion to the amount of negligence attributable to the person for whose injury, damage, or death recovery is made. (2) In any action to which subsection (1) of this section applies, the court, in a nonjury trial, shall make findings of fact or, in a jury trial, the jury shall return a special verdict which shall state: (a) The amount of the damages which would have been recoverable if there had been no contributory negligence; and (b) The degree of negligence of each party, expressed as a percentage.
Official text (excerpt) · last checked 2026-09-08 · Read the full text in our law library · Verify at olls.info
Cited in 26 court opinions in our collectionLatest citing opinion in our collection: 2026
Opinions citing this section in our collection:
- Lyons v. Nasby (Supreme Court of Colorado 1989, 13 Brief Times Rptr. 324)“…statute and is himself negligent as a matter of law. See C.R.S. section 13-21-111(1) (1973).” 8 Id. In our view,…”
- Colorado Flying Academy, Inc., a Colorado Corporation, Federal Insurance Company, and Associated Aviation Underwriters v. The United States of America (Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit 1984, 724 F.2d 871)“…lorado comparative negligence statute. See Colo.Rev.Stat. § 13-21-111 (1973). 10 . Plain…”
- Weaver v. Blake Ex Rel. Blake (Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit 2006, 454 F.3d 1087)“…percentage of responsibility is fifty percent or more. See Colo. Rev. Stat. § 13-21-111(1) (2005) (“Contributory negligence sha…”
Identified automatically from the court opinions citing this section — not a ranking of which case controls.
Also relied on in: Colorado Dashcam Laws: Legality, Mounting Rules, and Evidence Use, Colorado Car Accident Laws: Fault, Insurance, and Your Claim, Truck Accident Laws in Colorado (2026): Deadlines & Liability
§ 13-21-115Actions against landowners - short title - legislative declaration - definitionsIn forcecited in 2 of our articles
(1) The short title of this section is the Colorado Premises Liability Act. (2) The general assembly finds and declares that: (a) The provisions of this section were enacted in 1986 to promote a state policy of responsibility by both landowners and those upon the land as well as to ensure that the ability of an injured party to recover is correlated with the injured party's status as a trespasser, licensee, or invitee; (b) These objectives were characterized by the Colorado supreme court as legitimate governmental interests in Gallegos v. Phipps, 779 P.2d 856 (Colo.
Official text (excerpt) · last checked 2026-09-07 · Read the full text in our law library · Verify at olls.info
Cited in 61 court opinions in our collectionLatest citing opinion in our collection: 2026
Opinions citing this section in our collection:
- Sofford v. Schindler Elevator Corp. (District Court, D. Colorado 1997, 954 F. Supp. 1459)“…ues. Is the Colorado landowner liability statute, C.R.S. § 13-21-115 (1996 Cum.Supp.), the sole basis for la…”
- Nelson v. United States (Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit 2019, 915 F.3d 1243)“…andowners may be liable to entrants on their property, see Colo. Rev. Stat. § 13-21-115(2)–(5), and aspects of it represent “su…”
- Traynom v. Cinemark USA, Inc. (District Court, D. Colorado 2013, 940 F. Supp. 2d 1339)“…emises liability under the Colorado Premises Liability Act, C.R.S. § 13-21-115; common law negligence; and as to some…”
Identified automatically from the court opinions citing this section — not a ranking of which case controls.
Colorado Revised Statutes, Title 18: Criminal Code
§ 18-9-204.5Unlawful ownership of dangerous dog - legislative declaration - definitionsIn force
(1) The general assembly hereby finds, determines, and declares that: (a) Dangerous dogs are a serious and widespread threat to the safety and welfare of citizens throughout the state because of the number and serious nature of attacks by such dogs; and (b) The regulation and control of dangerous dogs is a matter of statewide concern. (2) As used in this section, unless the context otherwise requires: (a) Bodily injury means any physical injury that results in severe bruising, muscle tears, or skin lacerations requiring professional medical treatment or any physical injury that requires corrective or cosmetic surgery. (a.5) Bureau means the bureau of animal protection in the division of animal welfare, created pursuant to section 35-42-105, in the department of agriculture.
Official text (excerpt) · last checked 2026-07-29 · Read the full text in our law library · Verify at olls.info
Cited in 2 court opinions in our collectionLatest citing opinion in our collection: 2022
Opinions citing this section in our collection:
- Dias v. City and County of Denver (Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit 2009, 567 F.3d 1169)“…6- legislation. See Colo. Rev. Stat. § 18-9-204.5(5)(a). Denver suspended enforcement of…”
- Love v. Grashorn (District Court, D. Colorado 2022)“…th Cir. 2014) (quotation omitted). Under Colo. Rev. Stat. § 18-9-204.5, a “[d]angerous dog” is defined as any…”
Identified automatically from the court opinions citing this section — not a ranking of which case controls.
§ 18-1-901DefinitionsIn force
(1) Definitions set forth in any section of this title apply wherever the same term is used in the same sense in another section of this title unless the definition is specifically limited or the context indicates that it is inapplicable. (2) The terms defined in section 18-1-104 and in section 18-1-501, as well as the terms defined in subsection (3) of this section, are terms which appear in various articles of this code. Other terms which need definition but which are used only in a limited number of sections of this code are defined in the particular section or article in which the terms appear. (3) (a) To aid or to assist includes knowingly to give or lend money or extend credit to be used for, or to make possible or available, or to further the activity thus aided or assisted. (b) Benefit means any gain or advantage to the beneficiary including any gain or advantage to another person pursuant to the desire or consent of the beneficiary. (c) Bodily injury means physical pain, illness, or any impairment of physical or mental condition.
Official text (excerpt) · last checked 2026-07-29 · Read the full text in our law library · Verify at olls.info
Cited in 13 court opinions in our collectionLatest citing opinion in our collection: 2021
Opinions citing this section in our collection:
- City of Florence v. Pepper (Supreme Court of Colorado 2006, 145 P.3d 654)“…uthorized volunteer for purposes of article 10 of title 24, C.R.S. § 18-1-901(8)(4 )(IV.5)(E), C.R.S. (1996) (emphasi…”
- United States v. Melchor-Meceno (Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit 2010, 620 F.3d 1180)“…breaks, fractures, or burns of the second or third degree.” C.R.S. § 18-1-901(p). [4] Comparing the guideline lan…”
- United States v. Perez-Vargas (Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit 2005, 414 F.3d 1282)“…lness, or any impairment of physical or mental condition.” C.R.S. § 18-1-901(3)(c). Using the statutory defin…”
Identified automatically from the court opinions citing this section — not a ranking of which case controls.
Search our full record of US law — 2.1 million sections, every state + federal →
Sources and References
- C.R.S. 13-21-124 - Civil Actions Against Dog Owners(leg.colorado.gov).gov
- C.R.S. 18-9-204.5 - Unlawful Ownership of Dangerous Dog(leg.colorado.gov).gov
- C.R.S. 13-80-102 - Statute of Limitations (Two Years)(leg.colorado.gov).gov
- C.R.S. 13-21-111 - Comparative Negligence(leg.colorado.gov).gov
- C.R.S. 18-1-901(3)(p) - Definition of Serious Bodily Injury(leg.colorado.gov).gov
- C.R.S. 13-21-115 - Premises Liability(leg.colorado.gov).gov
- Denver Animal Protection - Breed-Restricted Permit Program(denvergov.org).gov
- C.R.S. 13-80-101 and 13-80-102 - Limitations of Actions (Colorado Revised Statutes 2025, Office of Legislative Legal Services)(olls.info)
- C.R.S. 18-9-204.5 - Unlawful Ownership of Dangerous Dog (Colorado Revised Statutes 2025, Office of Legislative Legal Services)(olls.info)