We’ve written about how most states impose strict liability for a dog bite, yet Pennsylvania has held out, demanding proof of negligence. In PA, an unprovoked attack could provide a basis for negligence per se.
However, in PA, proof of the attack alone was generally not enough to establish that the dog was legally “dangerous.” A plaintiff often needed evidence of earlier dangerous behavior. That evidence could show that the owner knew, or should have known, that the dog presented a danger.
Then, Pennsylvania changed its statutory dangerous-dog law in 2023 — taking effect in January of 2024. It created something close to strict liability for any unprovoked attack on a person.
What Changed in 2024?
Act 18 of 2023 became effective on January 22, 2024. It eliminated the separate requirement of proving a prior history of attacking or a propensity to attack without provocation.
As a result, a single unprovoked attack may now support a dangerous-dog determination. The injured person does not necessarily have to prove that the dog previously attacked someone or displayed the same dangerous behavior.
The amendment may also affect civil dog-bite cases. When the amended statute applies, an unprovoked attack may provide a basis for negligence per se without separate proof of a prior dangerous propensity.
The Big Question: What Do the Courts Say About the Legislative Amendment?
So here we are, coming up on three years since the Amendment has taken effect.
Has any court interpreted the amendment as valid or invalid?
So far, the answer appears to be no.
As of September 2026, no reported Pennsylvania appellate decision has interpreted the 2024 amendment. Likewise, no reported appellate decision has explained how the amendment affects a civil claim arising from an unprovoked dog attack.
The closest reported decision appears to be Bushner v. Nimeh, 2025 Pa. Dist. & Cnty. Dec. LEXIS 21 (Lehigh C.P. May 9, 2025).
In Bushner, the Lehigh County Court of Common Pleas discussed Pennsylvania’s dangerous-dog statute. The court also recited the amended statutory language. However, it did not mention Act 18. Nor did it compare the former and amended versions of the law. Additionally, it did not discuss the elimination of the prior-history-or-propensity requirement.
The 2024 Amendment Couldn’t Govern the Injury in Busher
The injury in Bushner occurred in November 2023. That was approximately two months before the amendment became effective. Therefore, the amendment could not properly govern the incident.
The amendment applies only to incidents occurring on or after January 22, 2024. It does not change the law that governed an earlier attack.
Consequently, incidents occurring before January 22, 2024 remain governed by the former law. In those cases, a plaintiff cannot use the amendment to avoid the former requirement of proving a prior history of attacking or a propensity to attack without provocation.
What Does Bushner Tell Us?
Ultimately, Bushner does not interpret the 2024 amendment.
At most, it is a decision issued after the amendment that quotes the amended statute while addressing an injury that occurred before the amendment. The court did not decide whether the new standard applies retroactively. It also did not apply the new standard to impose liability.
The facts were also unusual. The plaintiff was not bitten or attacked. Instead, she was injured when dogs collided with her while running and playing at a park.
The court found no evidence that the dogs had previously bitten, charged at, jumped upon, or injured anyone. It therefore granted summary judgment under Pennsylvania’s traditional common-law dangerous-propensity principles.
Conclusion
Therefore, Pennsylvania courts have yet to issue a reported decision applying the amendment to an unprovoked attack occurring on or after January 22, 2024.
Until that happens, Plaintiff-oriented lawyers (like yours truly) will interpret the 2024 amendments as written, to create liability for any unprovoked attack on a person. On the other hand, defense oriented attorneys will note that, even at this late date, the matter remains unsettled until a court rules on the validity of the amendment.
Contact Us Today
If you or someone you know suffered injuries from a dog attack, contact us for a free consultation!
412.400.5476