Going for a stroll in Oscar Frazier Park should not be a dangerous activity, but loose dogs might turn it into one. A dog bite injury can have very serious consequences, no matter the size of the animal.
South Carolina law strongly favors dog bite victims, holding a dog's owner strictly liable for injuries the dog causes, without requiring the victim to prove the owner did anything wrong. A Bluffton, SC, dog bite lawyer can help you understand how your rights work and build a strong claim that protects your recovery.
At the Arndt Law Firm, we represent dog bite victims across Bluffton and Beaufort County. So, if you were attacked or bitten by a dog and wonder whether you are owed compensation, contact us. The first consultation is free.
Most injury claims require proof that someone failed to act reasonably. A dog bite claim in South Carolina does not. Under South Carolina Code Section 47-3-110(A), if a person is bitten or otherwise attacked by a dog while in a public place or lawfully in a private place, the dog owner or the person having the dog in their care or keeping is liable for the damages suffered.
Three things ought to be looked for:
No. Section 47-3-110 imposes strict liability if the victim was in a public place or lawfully in a private place. There is no requirement to show the owner knew the dog was dangerous or failed to exercise reasonable care.
Section 47-3-110(B) provides that the statute does not apply in two circumstances.
Provocation: The statute does not say that any provocation defeats the claim. It says the section does not apply if the person who was attacked provoked or harassed the dog and that provocation was the proximate cause of the attack. The proximate cause requirement is the whole of the defense, and leaving it out misstates the law in the dog owner's favor.
Law enforcement dog: It applies where the dog was working in a law enforcement capacity with a governmental agency and in the performance of its official duties, and then only where a list of further conditions is met, including that the attack was in direct and complete compliance with the lawful command of a certified canine officer.
South Carolina treats an animal bite as a public health matter with a short clock, and the duty can land on the injured person. Under South Carolina Code section 47-5-90, a physician who attends a bite must report it to the county health department by the end of the next working day.
If no physician attends the bite, the responsibility falls on the bitten adult, or on the parent or guardian of a bitten child, to report it by the end of the next working day. The South Carolina Department of Public Health administers this, with county offices handling reports during business hours and a statewide line available outside them. Animal bites are classed as an urgently reportable condition, and providers report by telephone within 24 hours.
That report creates the evidence a claim later depends on. The county health department serves notice on the owner of a dog that has attacked or bitten a person, requiring the animal to be quarantined at the owner's expense for at least ten days. That process generates a dated official record identifying the animal and its owner, which is frequently the cleanest proof of ownership available.
An injured person who treats the bite at home and tells no one has a legal claim and no independent record of it. The reporting duty and the evidentiary value point in the same direction.
The county health department, under Section 47-5-90. A treating physician must report by the end of the next working day, and where no physician attends, the injured adult or a bitten child's parent or guardian carries that duty instead.
The state statute is not the only source of duty. Section 47-3-20 expressly authorizes local animal care and control ordinances, so a city or county may impose leash, confinement, containment, and dangerous animal requirements that the state code does not.
That matters in two ways. A violation of a local ordinance is evidence about the standard of care, and it may support a separate theory alongside the statutory claim. It also determines which body investigated, which determines where the records live.
Bluffton is an incorporated town within Beaufort County, and the incorporated and unincorporated areas are not necessarily served by the same animal control authority. Instead of guessing, the practical step is to establish which body responded to the specific incident and request its file, alongside the county health department record generated by the bite report.
The statute already reaches a keeper, which is the most commonly missed defendant. Beyond that, other parties can be responsible on separate theories.
A landlord may face exposure where the landlord knew of a dangerous animal on the property and had the ability to remove it, which is a premises theory, not a statutory one. A property manager, a homeowners association, or a business that permitted an animal on its premises can be reached on the same reasoning. Those claims turn on the visitor's status and on what the party knew, which is the framework covering premises liability cases.
If the attack happened at a short-term rental, a boarding kennel, a groomer, or a veterinary practice, a commercial policy may respond in addition to any personal one. Identifying every party who had control of the animal or the premises is what determines the money available.
Most dog bite recoveries come from a homeowner's or renter's policy, and the policy language decides how far it goes. Three issues recur.
Some policies exclude specific breeds outright. Some impose a separate, lower sublimit for animal liability instead of applying the full personal liability limit. And some exclude an animal with a prior recorded incident, which is one of several reasons the earlier bite history matters even though the claimant does not have to prove it.
Where the owner is a tenant, the renter's policy and the landlord's policy are separate potential sources, and they respond to different theories. Where the dog was in someone else's care at the time, that person's own policy may apply, which is a direct consequence of the statute naming keepers as well as owners.
| Potential source | When it responds | What to check |
|---|---|---|
| Owner's homeowner's policy | Owner is a homeowner | Breed exclusions, animal sublimits, prior incident exclusions |
| Owner's renter's policy | Owner rents the residence | Whether animal liability is included at all |
| Keeper's own policy | Dog was in another person's care | The statute names keepers, so this is a direct claim |
| Landlord or business policy | Knowledge of a dangerous animal, premises theory | What the party knew and could control |
South Carolina lets a victim recover where their share of the fault is not greater than the defendant's, under Nelson v. Concrete Supply Company (1991), with recovery reduced by that percentage and barred at 51 percent. However, whether a percentage reduction can be applied to a statutory dog bite claim at all is unsettled in South Carolina, and the Supreme Court has declined to import comparative negligence into strict liability claims in other settings.
There is a further point specific to this claim type. For causes of action accruing on or after January 1, 2026, a defendant in most South Carolina injury cases may ask that a party who was never sued be placed on the verdict form and assigned a share of the fault. That mechanism is not available here. Section 15-38-15(H)(4) provides that a nondefendant tortfeasor is not added to the verdict form where the causes of action involve strict liability.
Because Section 47-3-110 imposes liability without fault, that exclusion is directly relevant, and it means a dog bite claim is insulated from a tactic that now affects nearly every other kind of personal injury claim in South Carolina.
A dog bite claim can stall on a question that sounds trivial and is not: establishing who owned or kept the animal. An owner who denies ownership, an animal that belonged to a visitor, or a dog kept at a property by someone other than the resident all create the same problem.
The statutory reporting process is the most reliable answer, which is one more reason it matters. The county health department bite report identifies the animal and the person responsible for it, and the quarantine notice served under Section 47-5-100 is served on the owner by name, at the owner's expense. That is an official document created by a public body.
Local animal control records add to it where a responding agency generated a file. Where the animal had a licensing or vaccination record, that too establishes ownership and may establish a prior history.
Beyond ownership, the useful records are the ones created immediately. Photographs of the wounds before treatment and at intervals through healing, the names of anyone who witnessed the attack, the clothing worn, and the location of the attack relative to any fencing, gate, or leash all age quickly. If the attack happened at a rental property, a business, or a common area, the property's own incident record may exist as well.
The county health department bite report and the quarantine notice served on the owner both identify the responsible party, which is why reporting matters beyond the public health purpose. Local animal control files and licensing or vaccination records can also establish ownership.
Dog attacks produce a distinctive injury pattern: puncture wounds that carry a high infection risk, crush injuries from the jaw, nerve damage, and scarring in visible places. Facial injuries are disproportionately common in attacks on children because of their height.
Scarring damage is assessed on the permanent result, which is one reason a claim involving a child is often not ready to be valued quickly. Reconstructive treatment can extend over years, and psychological effects, including a lasting fear of dogs, are a recognized element of the claim.
The general deadline is three years from the date of the attack. For a child, the limitations period is tolled during minority. A parent does not have to wait, and there is usually good reason not to.
Where the animal belonged to a government agency, the Tort Claims Act applies instead, with a two-year deadline extendable to three by filing a verified claim within the first year. Claims under the Act also have a damages cap at $300,000 per person per occurrence, with $600,000 total per occurrence. Punitive or exemplary damages are not available.
The statute reaches the owner and the person having the dog in their care or keeping, which covers a great deal. Other situations require a different theory alongside it.
A landlord is not automatically responsible for a tenant's dog. Where the landlord knew of a dangerous animal on the property and had the ability to remove it or refuse it, a premises theory may reach them, and that claim turns on knowledge and control.
Short-term rentals raise the same analysis with an additional layer. A host who permits animals, or who keeps one at a property occupied by paying guests, is inviting people onto premises where an animal is present. A guest lawfully at the property is squarely within the statutory language, and the host may be both an owner and an occupier for these purposes.
Where an attack happens at a boarding kennel, a groomer, a veterinary practice, or a daycare, a commercial policy is likely to exist in addition to any personal one, and the business is frequently a keeper within the statute.
Homeowners associations and common area arrangements can matter in residential developments where an attack occurred in a shared space, since responsibility for that space may sit with an association.
Not under the dog bite statute itself, which reaches owners and keepers. A separate premises theory may apply where the landlord knew of a dangerous animal and had the ability to remove or refuse it.
A suit is filed in the Court of Common Pleas for Beaufort County, in the Fourteenth Judicial Circuit. The Clerk of Court is at 102 Ribaut Road in Beaufort.
Most dog bite claims resolve with a homeowner's carrier without suit being filed. Filing changes that when the carrier disputes ownership, asserts an exclusion, or takes a position on provocation that the evidence does not support.
Serious attacks, particularly on children, are transported to Memorial Health University Medical Center in Savannah. Records from a hospital in another state take longer to assemble, and in a scarring case the photographic record from the initial treatment carries weight throughout.
You may be owed economic damages and non-economic damages. There is no statutory cap for these types of damages in South Carolina.
The statute reaches a person who is bitten "or otherwise attacked," and that second phrase covers a category of claim people assume is not covered at all.
A dog that charges and knocks someone down causes an injury without closing its jaws. A large dog jumping on an older adult can cause a fracture. A dog that chases a cyclist or a runner into traffic causes an injury in which the animal never made contact. Each of those is an attack within the language of Section 47-3-110.
The same statutory framework applies to all of them. The injured person must have been in a public place or lawfully in a private place; liability attaches to the owner or to the person having the dog in their care or keeping, and the same two defenses apply.
Injuries from these incidents are frequently more serious than a bite. Hip fractures from a knockdown, head injuries from a fall, and secondary collisions after a chase produce consequences that outweigh a puncture wound, and they are often reported as falls, not as animal incidents, which affects how the record is created.
Yes. Section 47-3-110 applies where a person is bitten or otherwise attacked, which reaches knockdowns, jumping, and a chase that causes injury without contact.
No. Liability is statutory, and a claimant does not have to show the dog had bitten before or that the owner knew it was dangerous.
The statute reaches the person having the dog in their care or keeping as well as the owner. That person may be liable, and may carry their own insurance.
Only where the provocation or harassment was the proximate cause of the attack. That is a higher bar than the word alone suggests.
The later of three years from the attack or one year after turning eighteen. A parent can bring the claim on the child's behalf at any point before that.
The Arndt Law Firm handles dog bite cases on a contingency basis, meaning no fee unless there is a recovery. A free consultation is the usual way to discuss whether you have a viable claim.
At the Arndt Law Firm, we build Bluffton dog bite cases based on the facts and, always, on the law. We get all available evidence, and we document the full physical and emotional impact of the attack.
Because attorney Jonathan Arndt previously defended insurers, we understand how these claims are evaluated and contested and how to build them to reflect the true harm.
If you or your child was bitten or attacked by a dog in Bluffton or anywhere in Beaufort County, you should act fast. Contact us or call (843) 493-4590 for a free consultation; we handle these cases on a contingency basis with no fee unless there is a recovery.
Last reviewed: September 2026
This page was reviewed by Jonathan S. Arndt, licensed in South Carolina since 2018.
Content is provided for informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. Consult a licensed South Carolina attorney for guidance specific to your situation.
