Maryland
Maryland 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. · 9 primary sources cited on this page. How we verify our legal content

Maryland is a rebuttable-presumption state rather than a strict liability state for ordinary dog bites. Under Md. Code, Cts. and Jud. Proc. Section 3-1901(a)(1), evidence that a dog caused injury creates a rebuttable presumption that the owner knew or should have known the dog had vicious or dangerous propensities, and the owner is free to rebut it with evidence. True strict liability applies only under Section 3-1901(c), when the dog was running at large.
Estimate your claim: Use our free Maryland Dog Bite Settlement Calculator to see a rough settlement range based on the medical bills, the bite location, the victim's age, and Maryland's liability rule.
How Maryland Dog Bite Liability Works
Maryland provides strong protections for dog bite victims through a combination of statutory law and common law principles. The state's primary dog bite statute, Md. Code, Cts. & Jud. Proc. Section 3-1901, took effect on April 8, 2014, and fundamentally changed how liability works for dog owners across the state.

Unlike traditional "one-bite" states where victims must prove the owner knew their dog was dangerous, Maryland creates a rebuttable presumption of owner knowledge. If a dog causes personal injury or death, the law presumes the owner knew or should have known that the dog had vicious or dangerous propensities. The burden then shifts to the owner to prove otherwise.
This approach gives victims a significant legal advantage. You do not need to show that the dog bit someone before or that the owner received prior warnings about the dog's behavior. The injury itself triggers the presumption of liability.
Three Categories of Liability Under Section 3-1901
Maryland's statute creates three distinct liability frameworks depending on the circumstances.
Subsection (a): Owner liability with rebuttable presumption. When a dog owner is sued for personal injury or death caused by their dog, evidence that the dog caused the harm creates a rebuttable presumption that the owner knew or should have known about the dog's dangerous tendencies. The owner can attempt to overcome this presumption with evidence, but the starting position favors the victim.
Subsection (b): Non-owner liability under common law. When someone other than the owner is sued (such as a landlord, dog-sitter, or kennel operator), the pre-2012 common law rules apply. The victim must prove the non-owner knew or had reason to know about the dog's dangerous propensities. This standard is harder to meet but still allows claims against parties who harbored or cared for a dangerous dog.
Subsection (c): Strict liability for dogs running at large. The owner of a dog is liable for any injury, death, or loss to person or property caused by the dog while it is running at large. Maryland courts have defined "running at large" as meaning the dog is free, unrestrained, or not under control. This is true strict liability with no presumption to rebut.
The History Behind Maryland's Dog Bite Law
Understanding how Maryland arrived at its current framework helps explain the law's structure and purpose.
Tracey v. Solesky (2012)
In 2012, the Maryland Court of Appeals issued a landmark ruling in Tracey v. Solesky. The court declared pit bulls and pit bull mixes "inherently dangerous" and imposed strict liability on their owners and landlords for any injuries these dogs caused, regardless of whether the dogs had previously shown aggressive behavior.
The decision sparked intense public debate. Dog owners, animal welfare organizations, and landlords raised concerns about breed discrimination and the practical difficulties of identifying pit bull mixes. Landlords worried about increased liability exposure and began refusing to rent to tenants with certain dog breeds.
The 2014 Legislative Fix
In response, the Maryland General Assembly passed House Bill 73, which Governor Martin O'Malley signed into law on April 8, 2014. This legislation:
- Eliminated breed-specific strict liability from Tracey v. Solesky
- Applied the same legal standard to all dogs regardless of breed
- Created the rebuttable presumption framework for dog owners
- Preserved common law standards for non-owners
- Established absolute strict liability for dogs running at large
The result is the current Section 3-1901 framework that balances victim protection with fairness to responsible dog owners of all breeds.
Defenses Available to Dog Owners
Even under Maryland's victim-friendly framework, dog owners have several potential defenses.
Rebutting the Presumption
Under Subsection (a), the presumption that the owner knew about the dog's dangerous propensities is rebuttable. An owner can present evidence showing they had no reason to believe the dog was dangerous. This might include the dog's history of gentle behavior, training records, temperament assessments, or testimony from veterinarians and neighbors.
Statutory Exceptions for Dogs Running at Large
Under Subsection (c), even when a dog is running at large, the owner is not liable if the injured person was:
- Committing or attempting to commit a trespass or other criminal offense on the owner's property
- Committing or attempting to commit a criminal offense against any person
- Teasing, tormenting, abusing, or provoking the dog
Provocation
If the victim provoked the dog through teasing, hitting, tormenting, or other aggressive behavior, the owner's liability may be reduced or eliminated. The provocation must be significant enough that a normally calm dog would react aggressively.
Contributory Negligence
Maryland is one of only a few states that still follows the doctrine of contributory negligence. Under this rule, if the victim's own actions contributed even slightly to causing the injury, the victim may be completely barred from recovering any damages. This is an important defense in dog bite cases where the victim's behavior may have played a role.
Landlord Liability for Dog Bites in Maryland
Landlords and other non-owners face a different legal standard under Subsection (b) of Section 3-1901.
For non-owners, the common law rules that existed before April 1, 2012, apply. This means the victim must prove:
- The landlord knew or had reason to know the tenant's dog had dangerous propensities
- The landlord had the ability to remove the dog or take other protective action
- The landlord failed to act to protect others
A landlord's liability typically extends only to injuries that occur in common areas of the property, such as hallways, lobbies, parking lots, and shared outdoor spaces. If a dog bites someone inside the tenant's own rented unit, the landlord generally will not be liable.
Anyone who "harbors" a dog by giving it shelter or care can also face liability under these common law principles, even if they are not the dog's legal owner.
Practical Steps for Landlords
Landlords in Maryland should consider taking these steps to reduce liability:
- Include clear pet policies in lease agreements
- Require tenants with dogs to carry renter's insurance with liability coverage
- Document any complaints about aggressive dogs
- Take prompt action when a tenant's dog shows dangerous behavior
- Inspect common areas regularly for safety hazards related to pets
Damages Available in Maryland Dog Bite Cases
Dog bite victims in Maryland can pursue both economic and noneconomic damages.
Economic Damages
There is no cap on economic damages in Maryland. Victims can recover the full amount of:
- Medical expenses, including emergency care, surgery, and rehabilitation
- Future medical costs for ongoing treatment
- Lost wages and loss of earning capacity
- Property damage
- Costs of counseling or therapy
Noneconomic Damages
Maryland caps noneconomic damages under Md. Code, Cts. & Jud. Proc. Section 11-108. The cap increases by $15,000 each year on October 1. For injuries occurring in the current period (October 1, 2025, through September 30, 2026), the cap is $965,000 for personal injury cases.
Noneconomic damages include:
- Pain and suffering
- Emotional distress and psychological trauma
- Scarring and disfigurement
- Loss of enjoyment of life
- Loss of consortium
For wrongful death cases involving two or more claimants, the cap is 150% of the personal injury cap.
| Damage Type | Cap | Notes |
|---|---|---|
| Economic damages | No cap | Full recovery of all documented losses |
| Noneconomic damages (personal injury) | $965,000 (2025-2026) | Increases by $15,000 annually on Oct. 1 |
| Noneconomic damages (wrongful death, 2+ claimants) | $1,447,500 (2025-2026) | 150% of personal injury cap |
Statute of Limitations
Under Md. Code, Cts. & Jud. Proc. Section 5-101, dog bite victims have 3 years from the date of the injury to file a lawsuit. This deadline applies to all personal injury claims in Maryland.
Important details about the filing deadline:
- The clock starts on the date the bite or injury occurs
- If the victim is a minor (under 18), the 3-year period does not begin until the child turns 18, giving them until their 21st birthday to file
- Claims against government entities often have shorter notice requirements
- Missing the deadline almost always results in permanent dismissal of the claim
Do not wait until the deadline approaches. Evidence fades, witnesses become harder to locate, and medical records may become more difficult to obtain over time.
Dangerous Dog Designations Under Criminal Law
Maryland's dangerous dog statute, Md. Code, Criminal Law Section 10-619, provides a criminal framework for addressing dangerous dogs.
Definition of "Dangerous Dog"
A dog qualifies as "dangerous" if it:
- Without provocation, has killed or inflicted severe injury on a person
- Has been determined to be "potentially dangerous" by a county or municipal authority and then bites a person, kills or seriously injures a domestic animal when not on the owner's property, or attacks without provocation
"Severe injury" means a physical injury resulting in broken bones or disfiguring lacerations requiring multiple sutures or cosmetic surgery.
Requirements for Dangerous Dog Owners
Owners of dogs designated as dangerous must follow strict rules:
- Confinement: The dog cannot be left unattended on the owner's property unless confined indoors, in a securely enclosed and locked pen, or in another structure designed to restrain the dog
- Public access: The dog cannot leave the owner's property unless leashed and muzzled, or otherwise securely restrained and muzzled
- Transfer notification: If the owner sells or gives the dog to someone else, they must notify both the authority that made the dangerous determination and the new owner in writing
Criminal Penalties
Violating the dangerous dog statute is a misdemeanor punishable by a fine of up to $2,500. This criminal penalty applies on top of any civil liability the owner may face for injuries caused by the dog.
The statute does not apply to dogs owned by and working for a governmental or law enforcement unit.
Breed-Specific Legislation in Maryland
Maryland has moved decisively away from breed-specific regulations at both the state and local levels.
At the state level, Section 3-1901(b) retains the pre-April 2012 common law for claims against people other than the owner "without regard to the breed or heritage of the dog." Subsections (a) and (c), which govern owners, contain no breed distinction at all. Together they were a direct response to the Tracey v. Solesky ruling that singled out pit bulls.
At the local level, the most significant recent change occurred in Prince George's County. In November 2025, the Prince George's County Council voted to repeal its nearly 30-year ban on pit bull breeds. The new law, which took effect on February 2, 2026, replaced the breed-specific ban with behavior-based dangerous dog rules that include:
- Registration, education, and permit requirements for previously banned breeds
- Civil penalties: $500 for a first violation, $1,500 for a second, and $3,000 for a third
- Proof of microchipping, vaccination, and spaying or neutering
- Leash laws limiting leash length to 10 feet
With this change, Prince George's County, long the state's most prominent breed-ban jurisdiction, moved to a behavior-based approach. Maryland has no statewide breed ban, but local animal control ordinances vary from county to county and town to town, so check the code where you live before assuming no breed-specific rule applies.
Dog Owner Responsibilities
Maryland law imposes several responsibilities on all dog owners, not just those with dangerous dog designations.
Leash and Confinement Laws
While Maryland does not have a statewide leash law, most counties and municipalities require dogs to be leashed in public areas. Specific requirements vary by jurisdiction. Allowing a dog to run at large triggers strict liability under Section 3-1901(c).
Vaccination Requirements
Under Md. Code, Health-General Section 18-318, anyone who owns or keeps a dog, cat, or ferret that is 4 months old or older must have the animal vaccinated adequately against rabies. A county may not register or license the animal unless proof of adequate rabies vaccination is submitted with the application, and the public health veterinarian determines what proof is acceptable.
Licensing
Most Maryland jurisdictions require dogs to be licensed and registered. Licensing typically requires proof of current rabies vaccination.
Reporting Requirements
If a dog bites a person, the bite must be reported to the local health department. The dog may be required to undergo a quarantine period (typically 10 days) to monitor for signs of rabies.
How to File a Dog Bite Claim in Maryland
If a dog has bitten you in Maryland, take these steps to protect your legal rights:
-
Get medical treatment immediately. Your health is the top priority, and medical records serve as critical evidence of your injuries.
-
Report the incident. File a report with local animal control and the police. This creates an official record of the attack.
-
Document everything. Photograph your injuries (including follow-up photos as they heal), the location where the bite occurred, and the dog if possible.
-
Gather information. Get the dog owner's name, address, phone number, and homeowner's or renter's insurance information.
-
Identify witnesses. Collect names and contact information from anyone who saw the attack.
-
Preserve physical evidence. Keep torn or bloody clothing and any other items damaged in the attack.
-
Check the dog's history. Request records from animal control about any prior complaints or incidents involving the dog.
-
File your claim within 3 years. Under the statute of limitations, you must file a lawsuit within 3 years of the injury.
More Maryland Laws
Frequently Asked Questions
Is Maryland a strict liability state for dog bites?
Not for ordinary bites. Under Md. Code, Cts. & Jud. Proc. Section 3-1901(a)(1), evidence that a dog caused injury creates a rebuttable presumption that the owner knew or should have known about the dog's vicious or dangerous propensities, and the owner may rebut that presumption with evidence. True strict liability applies only under Section 3-1901(c): if the dog was running at large (free, unrestrained, or not under control), the owner is liable for any injury, death, or loss the dog causes, subject to the trespass, criminal offense, and provocation exceptions.
How long do I have to file a dog bite lawsuit in Maryland?
You have 3 years from the date of the injury under Md. Code, Cts. & Jud. Proc. Section 5-101. If the victim is a minor, the 3-year period does not start until the child turns 18, giving them until age 21 to file.
Can a landlord be held liable for a tenant's dog bite in Maryland?
Yes, but under a different standard than dog owners. The pre-2012 common law applies to non-owners like landlords. The victim must prove the landlord knew or had reason to know about the dog's dangerous propensities, had the ability to remove or control the dog, and failed to act. Liability is generally limited to incidents in common areas of the property.
Is there a cap on damages in Maryland dog bite cases?
Economic damages (medical bills, lost wages, property damage) have no cap. Noneconomic damages (pain and suffering, emotional distress) are capped under Md. Code, Cts. & Jud. Proc. Section 11-108. For injuries occurring between October 1, 2025, and September 30, 2026, the cap is $965,000.
Does Maryland ban any specific dog breeds?
Maryland has no statewide breed ban, and the state dog bite statute applies the same standards to all dogs regardless of breed. Prince George's County, the state's most prominent breed-ban jurisdiction, voted on November 18, 2025 to repeal its nearly 30-year pit bull ban, effective February 2, 2026, replacing it with behavior-based dangerous dog rules. Local ordinances still vary across Maryland, so check your county or municipal animal control code before assuming no breed-specific rule applies.
Injured in Maryland? 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 Maryland personal-injury attorney. Most work on contingency, so there is no upfront cost.
Updates
Corrected Maryland's liability rule: Section 3-1901 creates a rebuttable presumption of owner knowledge for ordinary bites, with strict liability only for a dog running at large; also corrected the rabies vaccination requirement and narrowed the breed-ban statement to Prince George's County.
Corrected the effective date of Prince George's County's pit bull ban repeal from December 2025 to the actual date, February 2, 2026.
Independently fact-checked against the cited primary sources; governing law re-checked for recent changes
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.
Maryland Code, Courts and Judicial Proceedings Article
§ 3-1901In forcecited in 2 of our articles
§3–1901. (a) (1) In an action against an owner of a dog for damages for personal injury or death caused by the dog, evidence that the dog caused the personal injury or death creates a rebuttable presumption that the owner knew or should have known that the dog had vicious or dangerous propensities. (2) Notwithstanding any other law or rule, in a jury trial, the judge may not rule as a matter of law that the presumption has been rebutted before the jury returns a verdict. (b) In an action against a person other than an owner of a dog for damages for personal injury or death caused by the dog, the common law of liability relating to attacks by dogs against humans that existed on April 1, 2012, is retained as to the person without regard to the breed or heritage of the dog.
Official text (excerpt) · last checked 2026-08-28 · Read the full text in our law library · Verify at mgaleg.maryland.gov
Cited in 2 court opinions in our collectionLatest citing opinion in our collection: 2026
Opinions citing this section in our collection:
- Santana v. State (Court of Appeals of Maryland 2026)“…lysis for altering the common law), superseded by statute, Md. Code Ann., Cts. & Jud. Proc. § 3-1901, as recognized in 75-80 Props., L.L.C.…”
- Diltz v. Ashton (District Court, D. Maryland 2022)“…rson without regard to the breed or heritage of the dog.” Md. Code, Cts. & Jud. Proc. § 3-1901(b). Under the common law of liability…”
Identified automatically from the court opinions citing this section — not a ranking of which case controls.
Also relied on in: Dog Bite Laws by State: Liability and Victim Rights
§ 5-101In forcecited in 7 of our articles
§5–101. A civil action at law shall be filed within three years from the date it accrues unless another provision of the Code provides a different period of time within which an action shall be commenced.
Official text (excerpt) · last checked 2026-09-08 · Read the full text in our law library · Verify at mgaleg.maryland.gov
Cited in 210 court opinions in our collectionLatest citing opinion in our collection: 2026
Opinions citing this section in our collection:
- College of Notre Dame of Maryland, Inc. v. Morabito Consultants, Inc. (Court of Special Appeals of Maryland 2000, 132 Md. App. 158)“…Maryland, the general statute of limitations is codified at Md.Code, Cts. & Jud. Proc. § 5-101 (Repl.Vol. 1998). This provision establ…”
- LaSalle Bank, N.A. v. Reeves (Court of Special Appeals of Maryland 2007, 173 Md. App. 392)“…arred by the three-year statute of limitations set forth in Md.Code Ann., Cts. and Jud. Proc. § 5-101. 2. Whether the circuit court erred i…”
- Fairfax Savings, F.S.B. v. Weinberg & Green (Court of Special Appeals of Maryland 1996, 112 Md. App. 587)“…must be filed within three years from the date it accrues. Md.Code Ann., Cts. & Jud.Proc. § 5-101 (1974,1975 Repl.Vol.). 17…”
Identified automatically from the court opinions citing this section — not a ranking of which case controls.
Also relied on in: Maryland Car Accident Laws: Fault, Insurance, and Your Claim, Motorcycle Accident Laws in Maryland (2026): Deadlines & Helmets, Maryland Slip and Fall Laws: Proving Premises Liability in a Pure-Contributory State
§ 11-108In forcecited in 3 of our articles
§11–108. (a) (1) In this section the following words have the meanings indicated. (2) (i) “Noneconomic damages” means: 1. In an action for personal injury, pain, suffering, inconvenience, physical impairment, disfigurement, loss of consortium, or other nonpecuniary injury; and 2. In an action for wrongful death, mental anguish, emotional pain and suffering, loss of society, companionship, comfort, protection, care, marital care, parental care, filial care, attention, advice, counsel, training, guidance, or education, or other noneconomic damages authorized under Title 3, Subtitle 9 of this article. (ii) “Noneconomic damages” does not include punitive damages. (3) “Primary claimant” means a claimant in an action for the death of a person described under § 3-904(d) of this article. (4) “Secondary claimant” means a claimant in an action for the death of a person described under § 3-904(e) of this article. (b) (1) In any action for damages for personal injury in which the cause of action arises on or after July 1, 1986, an award for noneconomic damages may not exceed $350,000.
Official text (excerpt) · last checked 2026-07-29 · Read the full text in our law library · Verify at mgaleg.maryland.gov
Cited in 15 court opinions in our collectionLatest citing opinion in our collection: 2025
Opinions citing this section in our collection:
- Erie Insurance Exchange v. Heffernan (Court of Appeals of Maryland 2007, 399 Md. 598)“…a. Maryland’s statutory cap on non-economic damages, Md.Code Ann., Cts. & Jud. Proc. § 11-108, where the insured and the insurer both…”
- Cole v. Sullivan (Court of Special Appeals of Maryland 1996, 110 Md. App. 79)“…Act, ch. 477, 1994 Md. Laws 2292 (codified as amended at Md. Code Ann., Cts. & Jud. Proc. §§ 11-108 , 11-109 (1995)). 11…”
- Bankert Ex Rel. Bankert v. United States (District Court, D. Maryland 1996, 937 F. Supp. 1169)“…and requires the trier of fact to itemize economic damages. Md.Code Ann.Cts. and Jud.Proc. §§ 11-108 and 11-109. Both Ariel and Kimberly Ban…”
Identified automatically from the court opinions citing this section — not a ranking of which case controls.
Also relied on in: Maryland Wrongful Death Laws (2026): Deadlines & Who Sues
Maryland Code, Criminal Law Article
§ 10-619In force
§10–619. (a) (1) In this section the following words have the meanings indicated. (2) “Dangerous dog” means a dog that: (i) without provocation has killed or inflicted severe injury on a person; or (ii) is determined by the appropriate unit of a county or municipal corporation under subsection (c) of this section to be a potentially dangerous dog and, after the determination is made: 1. bites a person; 2. when not on its owner’s real property, kills or inflicts severe injury on a domestic animal; or 3. attacks without provocation. (3) (i) “Owner’s real property” means real property owned or leased by the owner of a dog. (ii) “Owner’s real property” does not include a public right-of-way or a common area of a condominium, apartment complex, or townhouse development. (4) “Severe injury” means a physical injury that results in broken bones or disfiguring lacerations requiring multiple sutures or cosmetic surgery. (b) This section does not apply to a dog owned by and working for a governmental or law enforcement unit.
Official text (excerpt) · last checked 2026-07-29 · Read the full text in our law library · Verify at mgaleg.maryland.gov
Maryland Code, Health - General Article
§ 18-318In force
§18–318. (a) Each person who owns or keeps a dog, cat, or ferret that is 4 months old or older shall have the dog, cat, or ferret vaccinated adequately against rabies. (b) (1) A county may not register or license a dog, cat, or ferret unless the person who owns or keeps the dog, cat, or ferret submits, with the application for registration or license, proof that the dog, cat, or ferret has been vaccinated adequately against rabies. (2) The public health veterinarian shall determine the proof of vaccination that is acceptable.
Official text (excerpt) · last checked 2026-07-29 · Read the full text in our law library · Verify at mgaleg.maryland.gov
Search our full record of US law — 2.1 million sections, every state + federal →
Sources and References
- Md. Code, Cts. & Jud. Proc. Section 3-1901 - Personal Injury or Death Caused by Dog(mgaleg.maryland.gov).gov
- Md. Code, Cts. & Jud. Proc. Section 5-101 - Three-Year Limitation in General(mgaleg.maryland.gov).gov
- Md. Code, Cts. & Jud. Proc. Section 11-108 - Limitation on Noneconomic Damages(mgaleg.maryland.gov).gov
- Md. Code, Criminal Law Section 10-619 - Dangerous Dog(mgaleg.maryland.gov).gov
- Md. Code, Health-General Section 18-318 - Vaccination of Dogs and Cats(mgaleg.maryland.gov).gov
- House Bill 73 (2014) - Enrolled Bill Text(mgaleg.maryland.gov).gov
- Tracey v. Solesky, No. 53, September Term 2012 - Maryland Court of Appeals(mdcourts.gov).gov
- Prince George's County Council Passes Bill Ending Pit Bull Ban - Maryland Matters(marylandmatters.org)
- Maryland Criminal Code Section 10-601 et seq. - Crimes Relating to Animals(mda.maryland.gov).gov
- Prince George's County Council Bill CB-097-2025 - Legislative Record (effective date 2/2/2026)(princegeorgescountymd.legistar.com).gov