In Berrier v. Minnesota State Patrol, the Minnesota Court of Appeals held that the State is not strictly liable for injuries arising out of an unprovoked attack by a state patrol dog. Minnesota statutes impose strict liability, that is liability without the need to prove negligence or failure to use reasonable care, on dog owners for injuries arising out of unprovoked attacks. However, government entities enjoy numerous immunities to suit and, in this case, the court of appeals held that the State had not waived its immunities to strict liability dog attack claims. With strict liability claims unavailable, the claimant was left only with claims of negligence – which require proof that the dog owner acted unreasonably or without due care.
If you have been the victim of a dog attack, call Farrish Johnson Law Office so we can discuss your rights and potential claim.