N.H. Rev. Stat. Ann. » N.H. Rev. Stat. Ann. / Title xlv / Chapter 466
New Hampshire Revised Statutes

N.H. Rev. Stat. Ann. § 466:19 (2026)

Liability of Owner or Keeper

✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section NH-GCgc.nh.gov JustiaChapter on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar
    466:19 Liability of Owner or Keeper. – Any person to whom or to whose property, including sheep, lambs, fowl, or other domestic creatures, damage may be occasioned by a dog not owned or kept by such person shall be entitled to recover damages from the person who owns, keeps, or possesses the dog, unless the damage was occasioned to a person who was engaged in the commission of a trespass or other tort. A parent or guardian shall be liable under this section if the owner or keeper of the dog is a minor.

Source. 1851, 1124. CS 133:7. GS 105:7. GL 115:10. PS 118:9. PL 150:23. RL 180:23. RSA 466:19. 1989, 158:1. 1991, 213:1. 1995, 298:11, eff. Jan. 1, 1996.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 14 cases (1 in the last 5 years), 1964–2024 · leading case: Bohan v. Ritzo, 679 A.2d 597 (N.H. 1996).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Bohan v. Ritzo, 679 A.2d 597 (N.H. 1996). · cites it 15× “The plaintiff brought an action against the defendants under RSA 466:19 (1992) (amended 1995), which imposes strict liability upon dog owners for damages occasioned by their dogs.”
Blais v. Town of Goffstown, 406 A.2d 295 (N.H. 1979). · cites it 11× “The principal issue of law presented in this case involving personal injuries sustained by the plaintiff during an attack by a police dog owned by the defendant town is whether the trial court erred in ruling that the plaintiff could not avail herself of the statutory causes of…”
Allgeyer v. Lincoln, 484 A.2d 1079 (N.H. 1984). · cites it 12× “The plaintiffs claimed damages resulting from an alleged violation of RSA 466:19 and from common-law negligence on the part of the defendants, Robert and Susan Lincoln, for injuries inflicted by the Lincolns’ dog, *505 “Brandy,” on March 18, 1982.”
Dennis v. Town of Loudon, et al., 2012 DNH 165 (D.N.H. 2012). · cites it 4× “She also asserts state-law claims for malicious prosecution; strict liability for the dog attack under N.H. Rev. Stat. Ann. § 466:19 ; negligence in the handling of the dog; battery; and intentional infliction of emotional distressw This court has jurisdiction under 28 U.”
Hewes v. Roby, 606 A.2d 810 (N.H. 1992). · cites it 3× “This is an action in negligence as well as an action pursuant to the dog bite statute, RSA 466:19. The case was *477 tried in Superior Court (Smith, J.”
Douglas v. Fulis, 645 A.2d 76 (N.H. 1994). · cites it 5× “The plaintiff seeks recovery, pursuant to RSA 466:19 (Supp. 1989) (current version at RSA 466:19 (1992)) (the statute), for mental and emotional injuries incurred as a result of witnessing the defendants’ dog attack his daughter.”
Irwin v. Degtiarov, 8 N.E.3d 296 (Mass. App. Ct. 2014). “7, § 3961 (2002); N.H. Rev. Stat. Ann. § 466:19 (2007); N.M.”
Noyes v. Labrecque, 211 A.2d 421 (N.H. 1965). · cites it 2× “These are two actions of case brought under RSA 466:19 for the recovery of damages arising from an accident wherein the plaintiff and his wife Elizabeth were injured and the motorcycle on which they were riding damaged when the defendants’ dog ran out into the street in front of…”
Wike v. Allison, 200 A.2d 860 (N.H. 1964). “RSA 466:19 provides that “Any person to whom or to whose property damage may be occasioned by a dog not owned or kept by him shall be entitled to recover such damage of the person who owns .”
Richards v. Leppard, 392 A.2d 588 (N.H. 1978). · cites it 2× “By writ dated March 28, 1977, the plaintiff commenced a civil action against Larry Leppard, the lessor, under RSA 466:19 alleging that Larry Leppard was in “possession and control” of the dog in question.”
Lorrain v. Branscombe, 2012 DNH 024 (D.N.H. 2012). · cites it 12× “Lorrain’s complaint asserts a single claim against the elder Branscombe for strict liability under N.H. Rev. Stat. § 466:19, the“dog bite statute,” which provides that a "person to whom .”
Gagnon v. Martin, 358 A.2d 406 (N.H. 1976). · cites it 5× “The issue presented by this transfer is whether one injured by a dog can recover under RSA 466:19 against both the “owner” and “keeper” of the animal.”
Show all 14 citing cases →
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.