Dog Attack Raises Premises Liability Issues

January 1, 2005

Bernadette Rigo filed and prevailed in a motion for summary judgment in a premises liability case.

Plaintiff alleged that she was attacked by a neighbor’s dog when it escaped from their yard.  Her neighbors lived in a rental property managed by a major property management firm.  The management firm included language in their rental agreements that prohibited certain breeds of dogs.  The dog kept by the tenants was listed as one of the prohibited dogs.  When the tenants rented the property, they signed the rental agreement asserting that they did not have any pets.  Plaintiff alleged that the landlord was negligent by not checking the rental unit to confirm that the tenants did not own a pet. 

In two Nevada Supreme Court cases, landlords have been found liable on negligence claims if they have taken action to control an animal with a dangerous propensity.  Plaintiff asserted that the landlord in this case had asserted control over the dog by including language in the rental agreement that prohibited tenants from keeping dangerous breeds of dogs.  

The defense argued that in the pertinent cases, the landlords took an affirmative step, i.e. that the landlord knew the dog resided at the rental property and obtained a promise from the tenants to keep the animal in the yard.  In this case, the landlord was unaware of the dog and the mere inclusion of the language prohibiting certain dogs did not constitute an affirmative step.  The court agreed and judgment was entered in favor of the defense.