Florida Statute 767.4 - Full Text and Legal Analysis

The 2025 Florida Statutes

Title XLV
TORTS

Chapter 767
DAMAGE BY DOGS; DANGEROUS DOGS

View Entire Chapter

F.S. 767.04

767.04 Dog owner’s liability for damages to persons bitten.—The owner of any dog that bites any person while such person is on or in a public place, or lawfully on or in a private place, including the property of the owner of the dog, is liable for damages suffered by persons bitten, regardless of the former viciousness of the dog or the owners’ knowledge of such viciousness. However, any negligence on the part of the person bitten that is a proximate cause of the biting incident reduces the liability of the owner of the dog by the percentage that the bitten person’s negligence contributed to the biting incident. A person is lawfully upon private property of such owner within the meaning of this act when the person is on such property in the performance of any duty imposed upon him or her by the laws of this state or by the laws or postal regulations of the United States, or when the person is on such property upon invitation, expressed or implied, of the owner. However, the owner is not liable, except as to a person under the age of 6, or unless the damages are proximately caused by a negligent act or omission of the owner, if at the time of any such injury the owner had displayed in a prominent place on his or her premises a sign easily readable including the words “Bad Dog.” The remedy provided by this section is in addition to and cumulative with any other remedy provided by statute or common law.

History.—s. 1, ch. 25109, 1949; s. 1, ch. 93-13; s. 1155, ch. 97-102.

F.S. 767.04 on Google Scholar

F.S. 767.04 on CourtListener

Amendments to 767.04

Annotations, Discussions, Cases:

Cases Citing Statute 767.04

Total Results: 57

Jones v. Utica Mut. Ins. Co.

463 So. 2d 1153, 10 Fla. L. Weekly 159, 1985 Fla. LEXIS 3412

Supreme Court of Florida | Filed: Mar 7, 1985 | Docket: 448986

Cited 58 times | Published

aggressive act by a dog toward the injured party. In section 767.04 certain total immunities from owner liability

Carter v. City of Stuart

468 So. 2d 955, 10 Fla. L. Weekly 198

Supreme Court of Florida | Filed: Apr 4, 1985 | Docket: 1402493

Cited 21 times | Published

cause of action against the owner of the dog. § 767.04, Fla. Stat. (1983). [4] He decided to take no

Anderson v. Walthal

468 So. 2d 291, 10 Fla. L. Weekly 790

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Mar 26, 1985 | Docket: 1402757

Cited 20 times | Published

were the owners of the dog, it is clear that Section 767.04, Florida Statutes, placing liability on owners

Carroll v. Moxley

241 So. 2d 681

Supreme Court of Florida | Filed: Dec 16, 1970 | Docket: 1455396

Cited 17 times | Published

passing upon the constitutionality of Fla. Stat. § 767.04, F.S.A. We have jurisdiction, Fla. Const., art

Vandercar v. David

96 So. 2d 227, 66 A.L.R. 2d 912

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Jul 22, 1957 | Docket: 1284234

Cited 17 times | Published

enacted Chapter 25109, Laws of Florida, now Section 767.04, F.S.A., as follows: "767.04 Liability of owners

Noble v. Yorke

490 So. 2d 29, 11 Fla. L. Weekly 196

Supreme Court of Florida | Filed: May 1, 1986 | Docket: 2448098

Cited 16 times | Published

avoid the exemption from liability created by F.S. 767.04? Yorke v. Noble, 466 So.2d 349, 351 (Fla. 4th

Donner v. ARKWRIGHT-BOSTON MANUFACTURERS MUT. INS.

358 So. 2d 21

Supreme Court of Florida | Filed: Apr 6, 1978 | Docket: 1311875

Cited 16 times | Published

charged solely on the defenses expressed in Section 767.04. Prior to legislative enactment, the common

Kilpatrick v. Sklar

548 So. 2d 215, 1989 WL 84104

Supreme Court of Florida | Filed: Jul 27, 1989 | Docket: 1699362

Cited 14 times | Published

section 767.01, held the defenses available in section 767.04 are also applicable to causes of action accruing

Belcher Yacht, Inc. v. Stickney

450 So. 2d 1111

Supreme Court of Florida | Filed: May 3, 1984 | Docket: 2561806

Cited 11 times | Published

Constitution. The question certified is: WHETHER SECTION 767.04, FLORIDA STATUTES (1979) SUPERSEDED THE COMMON

Wendland v. Akers

356 So. 2d 368

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Mar 14, 1978 | Docket: 187786

Cited 11 times | Published

been taken. Plaintiff's case is bottomed on Section 767.04, Florida Statutes.[2] That statute was first

Romfh v. Berman

56 So. 2d 127, 1951 Fla. LEXIS 1008

Supreme Court of Florida | Filed: Dec 18, 1951 | Docket: 1355327

Cited 9 times | Published

bearing the words "Beware of Dogs" the statute, Section 767.04, F.S.A., requiring that he have displayed on

Tran v. Bancroft

648 So. 2d 314, 1995 WL 7650

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Jan 11, 1995 | Docket: 1343039

Cited 8 times | Published

Although the so-called "dog bite" statute, section 767.04, Florida Statutes (1993) controls actions against

REED BY & THROUGH LAWRENCE v. Bowen

503 So. 2d 1265, 11 Fla. L. Weekly 2254

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Oct 24, 1986 | Docket: 1453616

Cited 8 times | Published

Lawrence, individually, filed an action under section 767.04, Florida Statutes (1985), seeking damages which

Isaacs v. Powell

267 So. 2d 864

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Oct 4, 1972 | Docket: 1481591

Cited 8 times | Published

Additionally, we observe that Florida has enacted § 767.04, F.S.A.,[5] relating to dogs, which abrogates

Seachord v. English

259 So. 2d 136

Supreme Court of Florida | Filed: Feb 16, 1972 | Docket: 1516902

Cited 8 times | Published

case involved a dog bite and construed F.S. Section 767.04, F.S.A., and not F.S. Section 767.01, F.S.A

Ward v. Young

504 So. 2d 528, 12 Fla. L. Weekly 882

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Mar 27, 1987 | Docket: 453333

Cited 7 times | Published

provided a dog owner through compliance with section 767.04, Florida Statutes (1986), does not extinguish

Wipperfurth v. Huie

654 So. 2d 116, 1995 WL 94414

Supreme Court of Florida | Filed: Mar 9, 1995 | Docket: 2523982

Cited 6 times | Published

DEFENSE TO AN ACTION UNDER SECTION 767.04, FLORIDA STATUTES? 2. UNDER SECTION 767.04, DOES THE TERM "OWNER"

Reed v. Bowen

512 So. 2d 198, 12 Fla. L. Weekly 477

Supreme Court of Florida | Filed: Sep 17, 1987 | Docket: 1517309

Cited 5 times | Published

September 2, 1983. Shaun brought suit pursuant to section 767.04, Florida Statutes (1983), which provides: The

Manucy v. Manucy

362 So. 2d 478

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Sep 21, 1978 | Docket: 1363030

Cited 5 times | Published

they were strictly liable as dogowners under Section 767.04, Florida Statutes (1977), and second that they

Rosenfelt v. Hall

387 So. 2d 544

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Sep 10, 1980 | Docket: 1355399

Cited 4 times | Published

defense of provocation, per the provisions of section 767.04, Florida Statutes (1977), and the trial court

Rattet v. DUAL SEC. SYSTEMS, INC.

373 So. 2d 948

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Aug 7, 1979 | Docket: 1772868

Cited 4 times | Published

Rattet's attempt to impose liability pursuant to Section 767.04, Florida Statutes (1975), set forth below,

Josephson v. Sweet

173 So. 2d 463

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Sep 9, 1964 | Docket: 1276599

Cited 4 times | Published

[2] Thereafter, in 1949, the legislature adopted § 767.04, which provided, in pertinent part: "The owners

Olave v. Howard

547 So. 2d 349, 1989 WL 90928

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Aug 15, 1989 | Docket: 1738639

Cited 3 times | Published

Plaintiff brought suit against the dog owner under section 767.04, Florida Statutes (1987), and those claims

Staniszeski v. Walker

550 So. 2d 19, 1989 WL 80710

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Jul 21, 1989 | Docket: 1370894

Cited 3 times | Published

four-year-old child, held that the statutory defense in section 767.04 that the person mischievously or carelessly

Thomas v. Wyatt

405 So. 2d 1369

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Nov 18, 1981 | Docket: 1703586

Cited 3 times | Published

(2) statutory dog owner's liability under Section 767.04, Florida Statutes (1977), and (3) negligence

Harris v. Moriconi

331 So. 2d 353

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Apr 28, 1976 | Docket: 1685625

Cited 3 times | Published

the action was brought under the provisions of F.S. 767.04.[2] Defendants' answer in the form of a general

Sand v. Gold

301 So. 2d 828

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Oct 8, 1974 | Docket: 1338732

Cited 3 times | Published

liability for his dog biting anyone is based upon § 767.04, Fla. Stat., F.S.A. "Provided, however, no owner

Sutherlund Ex Rel. Sutherland v. Pell

738 So. 2d 1016, 1999 WL 596935

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Aug 11, 1999 | Docket: 1502961

Cited 2 times | Published

the common law, not on statutory liability. See § 767.04, Fla. Stat. (1997) (providing statutory liability

Flick v. Malino

356 So. 2d 904

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Mar 23, 1978 | Docket: 1478505

Cited 2 times | Published

found that the "bad dog" signs complied with Section 767.04, Florida Statutes (1975), and that Jennifer's

Hall v. Ricardo

297 So. 2d 849

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Jul 16, 1974 | Docket: 451119

Cited 2 times | Published

by Fla. Stat. § 767, F.S.A., and specifically § 767.04 with regard to dog bites. In the instant case

Tedrow v. Cannon

186 So. 3d 43, 2016 Fla. App. LEXIS 2391, 2016 WL 670348

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Feb 19, 2016 | Docket: 3037723

Cited 1 times | Published

2013 against Cannon for strict liability under section 767.04, Florida Statutes (2011), Florida’s dog-bite

Gawtrey v. Hayward

50 So. 3d 739, 2010 Fla. App. LEXIS 19461, 35 Fla. L. Weekly Fed. D 2886

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Dec 22, 2010 | Docket: 2401358

Cited 1 times | Published

a dismissal of the case on the theory that section 767.04, Florida Statutes (2007), made Scott and Cassandra

Trammell v. Thomason

559 F. Supp. 2d 1281, 2008 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 44210, 2008 WL 2338085

District Court, M.D. Florida | Filed: Jun 3, 2008 | Docket: 1819746

Cited 1 times | Published

City Fla. Stat. § 767.01 (Strict Liability) and § 767.04 (Strict Liability) (Dkt. 46) ("Trammell's Motion");

STEVEN RAMOS v. PATRICIA BASTOS

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Jun 22, 2022 | Docket: 63401302

Published

under 2 section 767.04, Florida Statutes (2018), the owner of a dog

DAVID PARSONS AND MARLA PARSONS v. PATRICIA CULP

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Sep 17, 2021 | Docket: 60392387

Published

injury to someone, but not by biting them. Section 767.04 is a separate statute, entitled "Dog

Deborah Davison v. Rebecca Berg

243 So. 3d 489

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Mar 22, 2018 | Docket: 6342217

Published

easily readable including the words ‘Bad Dog.’” § 767.04, Fla. Stat. 1 Berg presented evidence regarding

Arellano v. Broward K-9/miami K-9 Services, Inc.

207 So. 3d 351, 2016 Fla. App. LEXIS 17699

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Nov 30, 2016 | Docket: 4546372

Published

negligence contributed to the biting incident. § 767.04, Fla. Stat. (2011). As is clear from the

Fisel v. Wynns

650 So. 2d 46, 1994 WL 559632

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Feb 17, 1995 | Docket: 1703125

Published

difference in the statutes involved herein and section 767.04: The owner of any dog that bites any person

Huie v. Wipperfurth

632 So. 2d 1109, 1994 Fla. App. LEXIS 1682, 1994 WL 63320

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Mar 4, 1994 | Docket: 64746740

Published

common-law defense to an action brought under section 767.04, Florida Statutes (1989); thus, we reverse

Freire v. Leon

584 So. 2d 98, 1991 Fla. App. LEXIS 7350, 1991 WL 139132

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Jul 30, 1991 | Docket: 64660819

Published

thus relieving the owner of liability under section 767.04, Florida Statutes (1989). I would affirm.

Registe v. Porter

557 So. 2d 214, 1990 Fla. App. LEXIS 1104, 1990 WL 15923

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Feb 23, 1990 | Docket: 64648461

Published

language “Bad Dog” sign, posted pursuant to section 767.04, Florida Statutes (1983), is ineffective to

Bellanca v. Rodriguez

539 So. 2d 26, 1989 Fla. App. LEXIS 1147, 1989 WL 18804

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Mar 7, 1989 | Docket: 64640756

Published

Bowen, 503 So.2d 1265 (Fla. 2d DCA 1986); Section 767.04 Florida Statutes (1983).

Regueira v. Rafart

499 So. 2d 937, 12 Fla. L. Weekly 118, 1986 Fla. App. LEXIS 11142

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Dec 30, 1986 | Docket: 64623980

Published

asserting the defense available to them under Section 767.04, Florida Statutes (1983). Compare Noble v.

Porter v. Allstate Insurance Co.

497 So. 2d 927, 11 Fla. L. Weekly 2366, 1986 Fla. App. LEXIS 10529

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Nov 13, 1986 | Docket: 64623060

Published

precluding the owner’s liability pursuant to section 767.04, Florida Statutes (1985), which provides: 767

Kilpatrick v. Sklar

497 So. 2d 1289, 11 Fla. L. Weekly 2352, 1986 Fla. App. LEXIS 10530

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Nov 12, 1986 | Docket: 64623222

Published

one of the statutory defenses provided by section 767.04, Florida Statutes (1981),2 barred Kilpatrick

Godbey v. Dresner

492 So. 2d 800, 11 Fla. L. Weekly 1742, 1986 Fla. App. LEXIS 9227

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Aug 8, 1986 | Docket: 64621035

Published

absolute defense to the dog attack pursuant to section 767.04, Florida Statutes.1 In opposition, Godbey asserted

Associated Home Health Agency, Inc. v. Lore

484 So. 2d 1389, 11 Fla. L. Weekly 740, 1986 Fla. App. LEXIS 7012

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Mar 26, 1986 | Docket: 64618044

Published

DCA 1975). However, the statutory defenses of section 767.04, Florida Statutes (1983), which apply to an

Kaiser v. Baley

474 So. 2d 906, 10 Fla. L. Weekly 2050, 1985 Fla. App. LEXIS 15644

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Aug 29, 1985 | Docket: 64613809

Published

“bad dog” sign; a warning in accordance with section 767.04, Florida Statutes.1 This day the dog jumped

Yorke v. Noble

466 So. 2d 349, 10 Fla. L. Weekly 613, 1985 Fla. App. LEXIS 12776

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Mar 6, 1985 | Docket: 64610941

Published

amended complaint sought damages pursuant to F.S. 767.04. The second count alleged Defendants’ negligent

Kotcher v. Santaniello

438 So. 2d 440, 1983 Fla. App. LEXIS 24434

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Sep 14, 1983 | Docket: 64599822

Published

posting of signs pursuant to the provisions of section 767.04, Florida Statutes (1981). We also construe

Stickney v. Belcher Yacht, Inc.

424 So. 2d 962, 1983 Fla. App. LEXIS 18456

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Jan 11, 1983 | Docket: 64594535

Published

lawfully on the owner’s property, (2) whether Section 767.04, Florida Statutes (1979)1 superseded the common

Fusinski v. Robertson

391 So. 2d 771, 1980 Fla. App. LEXIS 18278

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Dec 30, 1980 | Docket: 64579397

Published

the trial court because of the provisions of Section 767.04, Florida Statutes (1979), which reads in part

Flick ex rel. Flick v. Malino

374 So. 2d 89, 1979 Fla. App. LEXIS 15446

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Aug 16, 1979 | Docket: 64571586

Published

decedent was immune from liability by virtue of Section 767.04, Florida Statutes. We reverse and remand for

Donner v. Arkwright-Boston Manufacturers Mutual Insurance

358 So. 2d 21, 1978 Fla. LEXIS 4771

Supreme Court of Florida | Filed: Apr 6, 1978 | Docket: 64564211

Published

charged solely on the defenses expressed in Section 767.04. Prior to legislative enactment, the common

Isaacs v. Powell

267 So. 2d 863

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Oct 4, 1972 | Docket: 64528188

Published

Additionally, we observe that Florida has enacted § 767.04, F.S.A.,5 relating to dogs, which abrogates the

Minisall ex rel. Minisall v. Krysiak

242 So. 2d 756, 1970 Fla. App. LEXIS 5386

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Nov 13, 1970 | Docket: 64518182

Published

liability in this case was governed by F.S. Section 767.04, F.S.A.,1 which statute *758makes the dog owner’s

Holland v. Scott

204 So. 2d 746

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Dec 12, 1967 | Docket: 64503302

Published

Vandercar v. David, Fla.App.1957, 96 So.2d 227; Section 767.04, Florida Statutes, F.S.A.