As an animal behavior expert witness serving attorneys in Florida, I have been called by attorneys who are interested in my opinions as a dog expert witness and canine bite expert.

Hence, For the purpose of providing counsel in Florida an introduction to my work as a dog expert witness, this page serves as an introduction.

Below, rather than a dog related lawsuit, I present  a case of a   dog knockdown in which I testified in Florida as a canine expert witness. As in many dog bite lawsuits in Florida and nearby states like Georgia, my opinions were needed to address a common animal behavior issue regarding liability: Namely provocation by the plaintiff directed towards a canine.

Dog expert witness opinion about provocation in Florida

Animal behavior expert withess opinion about provocation in lawsuits about canines causing personal injury has been discussed elsewhere on this website.  In the example below I present a case that did not result in a dog bite but rather a lawsuit in which a golden retriever knocked down the 78-year-old plaintiff.  The plaintiff was not bitten; hence, Florida law pertaining to strict liability for dog bites did not apply.

The incident happened in a quiet residential community in the suburbs of Jacksonville, Florida. The dog involved was a large, 80-pound super-friendly golden retriever.  Undisputed facts in this lawsuit were as follows: The defendant-dog owner was walking his adult golden retriever, Dakota, on a retractable leash.  The neighborhood in which Dakota was being walked consisted of single-suburban family homes. Dakota had been walked in this neighborhood on hundreds of occasions prior to the incident. There were never any problems during his encounters with unfamiliar people during his walks. Dakota’s temperament was  like that of many golden retrievers: well-tempered, friendly, and equally affectionate to family members and strangers.

Dakota had a history of jumping on people when they entered the home. However, his jumping-on-people was specific to this context . Dakota had never jumped on a stranger while being walked in the neighborhood. Dakota was obedience trained.

On the day of the incident, the defendant was walking Dakota in the usual manner, and the plaintiff, a person who had never encountered Dakota previously, approached and bent down towards Dakota,  sniffing the ground about 5-7 feet away. Dakota did not notice the plaintiff until she said something to the effect, “oh, what a pretty dog”. Dakota’s reaction was immediate. He quickly approached the plaintiff, raised up on his hind legs and then placed his paws on the plaintiff’s chest. The actions of Dakota caused the plaintiff to fall. She sustained a separated shoulder and she injured her hip.

Florida dog law pertaining to provocation

Section 767.04, Florida statutes reads:

“No owner of any dog shall be liable for any damages to any person… when such person shall… carelessly provoke… the dog inflicting such damage…”

The jury considered the following questions: Did the plaintiff’s actions provoke Dakota to jump and were her actions careless given the totality of the circumstances?

Three animal behavior criteria were used to determine if provocation occurred. Namely, (a) Did the plaintiff direct an action to the dog? (b) Did Dakota react immediately to the plaintiff’s action? (c) Did the plaintiff’s actions cause a motivational change in the dog?

All three criteria were met. Namely, the plaintiff’s actions were directed to Dakota. Dakota immediately reacted by approaching the plaintiff and jumping on the plaintiff.  Third,  Dakota’s motivation changed from one of exploring and sniffing the ground to approaching the plaintiff and jumping on her.  In short, from  my perspective as a dog expert witness this incident would have never happened if the plaintiff had not invited social interaction from Dakota.

The verdict

The jury rendered a defense verdict.  The jury found the plaintiff 100% at fault. The plaintiff’s counsel did not present a viable argument to counter the defense of provocation. Instead, in the absence of any  animal behavior expert witness testimony, plaintiff’s counsel argued that the defendant was liable because he did not immediately control Dakota when he first noticed the plaintiff from a distance. However, the judge ruled that negligence by the defendant was not an issue for the jury.

The defense verdict was based on the plaintiff’s provocative actions directed towards Dakota. The jury concluded that her actions were careless given the totality of circumstances in which the incident occurred.  The jury concluded that the plaintiff chose to interact with Dakota and, given this, she should have known that she could be injured. The plaintiff extended a social invitation to a large dog she did not know. Before extending this invitation, given her age and medical condition, she should have known that Dakota might approach, possibly jump on her, and knock her down. ^[1]This case also demonstrates that a dog knock-down injury can result in serious injury. Usually, the context in which this happens is not in a residential area, as in the current case, but rather in … Continue reading

Florida case law is sparse with regard to provocation in dog-related injury cases cases.  Nonetheless, this issue frequently arises in dog bite litigation in Florida, given that Florida is a “strict liability” state. I direct the reader to an external website as it pertains to Florida dog bite law. ^[2]Also see Law in Broward County as it pertains to animals, including dogs.

_______

Richard Polsky, Ph.D. has been retained by Florida attorneys as an animal behavior expert witness more than a dozen occasions.  Interested attorneys should contact Dr. Polsky to determine his availability to serve as a dog expert witness in Florida.  Dr. Polsky is based in Los Angeles California but serves dog bite attorneys nationwide, particularly now since Covid most expert witness work including deposition testimony can be successfully completed remotely.