Does a Dog Bite Criminal Conviction Guaranty Civil Liability (For a Bite)?
Some Background
Pennsylvania Dog Law imposes criminal penalties for harboring a dangerous dog or failing to control it. In fact, Pennsylvania recently increased criminal penalties and fines for violations of PA’s Dog Law.
While the criminal courts excel at punishing criminals (through fines and/or imprisonment), they are notoriously poor at recovering money — or restitution — for the harm caused by the criminal conduct. Thus, for financial compensation, a dog bite victim should turn to a civil lawyer (in the civil court system apart from the criminal system) to recover money for pain, suffering, disfigurement and payment of medical bills or cosmetic surgery.
The question then becomes: what effect does the criminal case (against those responsible for a dog) have on the civil claim for compensation, by the person injured by the dog? For example, what happens when a person pleads “guilty” to a criminal offense relating to a dog — or, even worse, a court finds the defendant “guilty” — on the criminal side?
Does criminal “guilt” make the civil claim (for compensation) a “slam dunk”?
Breaking It Down
This question sounds straightforward. However, it involves the interplay between three different (and challenging) law school courses: torts, civil procedure (dreaded by many students) and criminal law. The PA Bar tests each subject heavily on the bar exam. But don’t worry! You’ve come to the right place. We’ll explain it so even the person dead last in his law school class can understand it!
Ask The First Question, First
The first question is: what’s the severity of the charge? Felonies and misdemeanors are the most serious. A person facing such charges has the incentive to fight for his or her freedom to beat the charge. Plus, the burden of proof in criminal court is “beyond a reasonable doubt,” which is the highest standard. Hence, a guilty verdict or plea to a felony or misdemeanor carries certain weight, in the civil courts, where the burden of proof is only “more likely than not,” or by a “preponderance of the evidence.”
Summary offenses, by contrast, are essentially parking tickets. A person has almost no incentive to fight a parking ticket, because it’s a simple fine: no points, no incarceration. Why take a day off of work — or pay a lawyer — to come into court to prove the real facts underlying your defense to a parking ticket?
Hence, a summary offense “conviction” means almost nothing.
But here’s the problem in dog bite cases: nearly every violation of PA’s Dog Law amounts to a mere “summary offense.” Thus, being found guilty “harboring a dangerous dog” or letting a dog run “at large” does nothing to establish civil liability for harm the dog causes, right?
Not necessarily.
Going A Step Deeper: Understanding Each Stage of Criminal Procedure
Criminal charges are filed at the lowly magisterial district judge (MDJ) stage (We’re sorry MDJs that we’ve helped get elected, but it’s true! You’re the lowest level courts!). An MDJ decision is not a true “court order.” There’s no “court reporter” recording the “facts” at the hearing before an MDJ. In fact, all MDJ decisions can be appealed as a matter of right (or “de novo”), which means, the defendant gets a “do-over” for convictions at the MDJ level.
Thus, the MDJs “finding” that a defendant had parked illegally — or failed to control his dog — means almost nothing, so long as the defendant files a timely appeal.
However, once the MDJ’s decision is appealed, the “summary offense” then goes before a Court of Common Pleas Judge (“Actual Judge”). There, a court reporter is present. The Defendant — who appealed the MDJ decision — is apparently taking the case seriously. Here, before an Actual Judge, the stakes go up dramatically. A defendant who insists upon having his “da-in-court” now has it, before an Actual Judge. Therefore, if found guilty, he is “estopped” (or prevented) from denying his guilt in the civil courts.
Here’s a case not taught in law school.
Walsh v. Toth, No. 22-CV-96 (C. P. Lacka. Co. Oct. 6, 2023 Nealon, J.)
In the case of Walsh v. Toth, No. 22-CV-96 (C. P. Lacka. Co. Oct. 6, 2023 Nealon, J.), a magisterial district judge (MDJ) found a dog’s owner (Toth) guilty of violating §305(a) of the Dog Law, 3 P.S. §459-305(a). The defendant / dog owner appealed the summary offense conviction to the Court of Common Pleas for a de novo trial. There, the dog owner raised certain defenses. However, a the judge found him guilty beyond a reasonable doubt of violating the above-referenced section of the dog law.
That was that, criminally.
Then, in the civil courts, the person injured by Toth’s dog filed a civil suit for negligence and compensatory damages. To prove negligence, the injured party claimed Toth was “estopped” (or prevented) from denying civil liability given the criminal conviction referenced above. The judge in the civil case, Judge Nealon, reviewed Pennsylvania law and found that a summary offense conviction collaterally estops a defendant from denying his adjudicated acts in a later civil suit, so long as (1) the defendant had appealed his conviction by a magisterial district judge, (2) participated in a trial hearing before a Common Pleas judge (which gives the Defendant a full and fair opportunity to litigate his issues, and (3) is found guilty, citing to Shaffer v. Smith, 673 A.2d 872, 543 Pa. 526, 543 Pa. 2d 526 (1996).
As such, based upon these circumstances in this case, the court found that the dog owner was estopped from denying that his unrestrained dog entered the Plaintiff’s home and knocked down a staircase or that he was guilty of violating the dog law.
Getting Answers to Key Questions
We hope you’ve found this article informative. In return, we ask only one question: apart from this blog, has any other law firm in person or online even come close to providing these kinds of answers to complex questions about dog bite law? We’re guessing “no.”
But how do we know?
We’ve gone to law school with lawyers who now advertise to help dog bite victims. There’s a reason why, without us spending a dime on advertising, our firm comes up first in Google searches for meaningful information about dog bite law. The answer is simple: we’re the attorneys that other lawyers call when the issues get complicated.
Let’s Get Started!
You’ve come to the right place. Our Pittsburgh dog bite lawyers provide a free consultation about any claim for injuries from a canine attack in Pennsylvania.
412.400.5476