EnglishEspañol
Minnesota flag

Minnesota

Leyes de Minnesota sobre Mordeduras de Perro: Responsabilidad y Derechos de la Víctima

Por Equipo Editorial de Recording Law16 min de lectura
Leyes de Minnesota sobre Mordeduras de Perro: Responsabilidad y Derechos de la Víctima

Preguntas frecuentes

¿Minnesota es un estado de responsabilidad estricta por mordeduras de perro?

Sí. Bajo Minn. Stat. § 347.22, los dueños de perros son responsables por todos los daños cuando su perro ataca o lesiona a alguien que actúa de manera pacífica en un lugar donde tiene derecho legal a estar. La víctima no necesita probar que el dueño sabía que el perro era peligroso o que el dueño fue negligente.

¿Cuánto tiempo tengo para presentar una demanda por mordedura de perro en Minnesota?

Minnesota da a las víctimas de mordedura de perro seis años desde la fecha del ataque para presentar una demanda por lesiones personales bajo Minn. Stat. § 541.05. Sin embargo, los reclamos contra entidades gubernamentales pueden tener plazos de notificación más cortos, y los menores de edad pueden tener períodos de presentación extendidos.

¿Puede la culpa comparativa reducir mis daños por mordedura de perro en Minnesota?

No. Los tribunales de Minnesota han determinado que la culpa comparativa no es una defensa válida en los casos de mordedura de perro bajo el § 347.22. Las únicas defensas disponibles para el dueño del perro son la provocación y la presencia ilegal de la víctima o su falta de actuar de manera pacífica.

¿Cuáles son los requisitos para poseer un perro peligroso en Minnesota?

Bajo Minn. Stat. § 347.51, los dueños de perros peligrosos deben registrar al animal, obtener al menos $300,000 en seguro de responsabilidad civil o una fianza de garantía, pagar una tarifa anual de hasta $500, implantarle un microchip, mantener un recinto seguro y colocar letreros de advertencia en la propiedad.

¿Puede una ciudad de Minnesota prohibir a los pit bulls u otras razas específicas?

No. Minnesota tiene una ley de preferencia estatal que prohíbe a los municipios promulgar legislación específica por raza. En lugar de prohibiciones por raza, el estado usa un sistema basado en el comportamiento que designa a los perros individuales como peligrosos o potencialmente peligrosos según sus acciones.

¿Lesionado en Minnesota? Obtenga una revisión gratuita del caso con un abogado de lesiones personales

Si la negligencia de otra persona causó su lesión, podría tener derecho a compensación por gastos médicos, salarios perdidos y dolor y sufrimiento. Obtenga una revisión gratuita y sin compromiso de un abogado de lesiones personales en Minnesota. La mayoría trabaja por honorarios contingentes, así que no hay costo inicial.

Actualizaciones

Ley aplicable revisada en busca de cambios recientes

Ley aplicable revisada en busca de cambios recientes

La ley detrás de este artículo

Este artículo se apoya en 7 disposiciones legales conservadas en nuestro propio registro jurídico, cada una obtenida de la fuente oficial. Toque una sección para leer el texto vigente.

Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 347: DOGS AND CATS

§ 347.22DAMAGES, OWNER LIABLEVigentecitada en 2 de nuestros artículos
If a dog, without provocation, attacks or injures any person who is acting peaceably in any place where the person may lawfully be, the owner of the dog is liable in damages to the person so attacked or injured to the full amount of the injury sustained. The term "owner" includes any person harboring or keeping a dog but the owner shall be primarily liable. The term "dog" includes both male and female of the canine species.

Texto oficial (extracto) · al 2026-07-29 · Lea la sección completa en revisor.mn.gov

Citada en 32 opiniones judiciales1980s: 51990s: 82000s: 82010s: 92020s: 2Aplicada por un tribunal por última vez: 2024

Casos destacados: Seim Ex Rel. Seim v. Garavalia (Supreme Court of Minnesota 1981, 306 N.W.2d 806) · Hyatt v. Anoka Police Department (Supreme Court of Minnesota 2005, 691 N.W.2d 824) · Engquist v. Loyas (Supreme Court of Minnesota 2011, 803 N.W.2d 400)

Identificado automáticamente a partir de las opiniones judiciales que citan esta sección; no es un ranking de qué caso prevalece.

§ 347.50DEFINITIONSVigente
Subdivision 1. Terms. For the purpose of sections 347.50 to 347.56, the terms defined in this section have the meanings given them. Subd. 2. Dangerous dog. "Dangerous dog" means any dog that has: (1) without provocation, inflicted substantial bodily harm on a human being on public or private property; (2) killed a domestic animal without provocation while off the owner's property; or (3) been found to be potentially dangerous, and after the owner has notice that the dog is potentially dangerous, the dog aggressively bites, attacks, or endangers the safety of humans or domestic animals. Subd. 3. Potentially dangerous dog. "Potentially dangerous dog" means any dog that: (1) when unprovoked, inflicts bites on a human or domestic animal on public or private property; (2) when unprovoked, chases or approaches a person, including a person on a bicycle, upon the streets, sidewalks, or any public or private property, other than the dog owner's property, in an apparent attitude of attack; or (3) has a known propensity, tendency, or disposition to attack unprovoked, causing injury or otherwise threatening the safety of humans or domestic animals. Subd. 4. Proper enclosure.

Texto oficial (extracto) · al 2026-07-29 · Lea la sección completa en revisor.mn.gov

Citada en 5 opiniones judiciales2000s: 32010s: 2Aplicada por un tribunal por última vez: 2017

Casos destacados: Hannan v. City of Minneapolis (Court of Appeals of Minnesota 2001, 623 N.W.2d 281) · In Re the Disposition of Molly (Court of Appeals of Minnesota 2006, 712 N.W.2d 567) · State v. Mikulak (Supreme Court of Minnesota 2017, 903 N.W.2d 600)

Identificado automáticamente a partir de las opiniones judiciales que citan esta sección; no es un ranking de qué caso prevalece.

§ 347.51DANGEROUS DOGS; REGISTRATIONVigente
Subdivision 1. Requirement. No person may own a dangerous dog in this state unless the dog is registered as provided in this section. Subd. 2. Registration. An animal control authority shall issue a certificate of registration to the owner of a dangerous dog if the owner presents sufficient evidence that: (1) a proper enclosure exists for the dangerous dog and a posting on the premises with a clearly visible warning sign that there is a dangerous dog on the property, including a warning symbol to inform children; (2) a surety bond issued by a surety company authorized to conduct business in this state in a form acceptable to the animal control authority in the sum of at least $300,000, payable to any person injured by the dangerous dog, or a policy of liability insurance issued by an insurance company authorized to conduct business in this state in the amount of at least $300,000, insuring the owner for any personal injuries inflicted by the dangerous dog; (3) the owner has paid an annual fee of not more than $500, in addition to any regular dog licensing fees, to obtain a certificate of registration for a dangerous dog under this section; and (4) the owner has had microchip…

Texto oficial (extracto) · al 2026-07-29 · Lea la sección completa en revisor.mn.gov

Citada en 3 opiniones judicialesAplicada por un tribunal por última vez: 2017

Casos destacados: In Re the Disposition of Molly (Court of Appeals of Minnesota 2006, 712 N.W.2d 567) · Hannan v. City of Minneapolis (Court of Appeals of Minnesota 2001, 623 N.W.2d 281) · In the Matter of the Determination of a Dangerous Animal Seizure and Order to Destroy (Court of Appeals of Minnesota 2017)

Identificado automáticamente a partir de las opiniones judiciales que citan esta sección; no es un ranking de qué caso prevalece.

§ 347.515MICROCHIP IDENTIFICATIONVigente
The owner of a dangerous or potentially dangerous dog must have a microchip implanted in the dog for identification, and the name of the microchip manufacturer and identification number of the microchip must be provided to the animal control authority. If the microchip is not implanted by the owner, it may be implanted by the animal control authority. In either case, all costs related to purchase and implantation of the microchip must be borne by the dog's owner.

Texto oficial (extracto) · al 2026-07-29 · Lea la sección completa en revisor.mn.gov

§ 347.55PENALTYVigente
(a) A person who violates a provision of section 347.51, 347.515, or 347.52 is guilty of a misdemeanor. (b) It is a misdemeanor to remove a microchip from a dangerous or potentially dangerous dog, to fail to renew the registration of a dangerous dog, to fail to account for a dangerous dog's death or change of location where the dog will reside, to sign a false affidavit with respect to a dangerous dog's death or change of location where the dog will reside, or to fail to disclose ownership of a dangerous dog to a property owner from whom the person rents property. (c) A person who is convicted of a second or subsequent violation of paragraph (a) or (b) is guilty of a gross misdemeanor. (d) An owner who violates section 347.542, subdivision 1, is guilty of a gross misdemeanor. (e) Any household member who knowingly violates section 347.542, subdivision 2, is guilty of a gross misdemeanor.

Texto oficial (extracto) · al 2026-07-29 · Lea la sección completa en revisor.mn.gov

Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 541: LIMITATION OF TIME, COMMENCING ACTIONS

§ 541.05VARIOUS CASES, SIX YEARSVigentecitada en 8 de nuestros artículos
Subdivision 1. Six-year limitation. Except where the Uniform Commercial Code otherwise prescribes, the following actions shall be commenced within six years: (1) upon a contract or other obligation, express or implied, as to which no other limitation is expressly prescribed; (2) upon a liability created by statute, other than those arising upon a penalty or forfeiture or where a shorter period is provided by section 541.07; (3) for a trespass upon real estate; (4) for taking, detaining, or injuring personal property, including actions for the specific recovery thereof; (5) for criminal conversation, or for any other injury to the person or rights of another, not arising on contract, and not hereinafter enumerated; (6) for relief on the ground of fraud, in which case the cause of action shall not be deemed to have accrued until the discovery by the aggrieved party of the facts constituting the fraud; (7) against sureties upon the official bond of any public officer, whether of the state or of any county, town, school district, or a municipality therein; in which case the limitation shall not begin to run until the term of such officer for which the bond was given shall have…

Texto oficial (extracto) · al 2026-07-29 · Lea la sección completa en revisor.mn.gov

Citada en 438 opiniones judiciales1960s: 11970s: 61980s: 1081990s: 952000s: 792010s: 972020s: 52Aplicada por un tribunal por última vez: 2026

Casos destacados: Henning Nelson Construction Co. v. Fireman's Fund American Life Insurance Co. (Supreme Court of Minnesota 1986, 383 N.W.2d 645) · Toombs v. Daniels (Supreme Court of Minnesota 1985, 361 N.W.2d 801) · Wegan v. Village of Lexington (Supreme Court of Minnesota 1981, 309 N.W.2d 273)

Identificado automáticamente a partir de las opiniones judiciales que citan esta sección; no es un ranking de qué caso prevalece.

Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 609: CRIMINAL CODE

§ 609.226HARM CAUSED BY DOGVigente
Subdivision 1. Great or substantial bodily harm. A person who causes great or substantial bodily harm to another by negligently or intentionally permitting any dog to run uncontrolled off the owner's premises, or negligently failing to keep it properly confined is guilty of a misdemeanor. A person who is convicted of a second or subsequent violation of this section involving the same dog is guilty of a gross misdemeanor. Subd. 2. Dangerous dogs. If the owner of a dangerous dog, as defined under section 347.50, subdivision 2, has been convicted of a misdemeanor under section 347.55, and the same dog causes bodily injury to a person other than the owner, the owner is guilty of a gross misdemeanor and may be sentenced to imprisonment for not more than 364 days or to payment of a fine of not more than $3,000, or both. Subd. 3. Defense. If proven by a preponderance of the evidence, it shall be an affirmative defense to liability under subdivision 1 or 2 that the victim provoked the dog to cause the victim's bodily harm. Subd. 4. Harm to service animal caused by dog; crime, mandatory restitution.

Texto oficial (extracto) · al 2026-07-29 · Lea la sección completa en revisor.mn.gov

Citada en 3 opiniones judicialesAplicada por un tribunal por última vez: 2015

Casos destacados: State v. Livingston (Court of Appeals of Minnesota 1988, 420 N.W.2d 223) · State v. Foncesa (Court of Appeals of Minnesota 1993, 505 N.W.2d 370) · State of Minnesota v. Javon Lamar Johnson (Court of Appeals of Minnesota 2015)

Identificado automáticamente a partir de las opiniones judiciales que citan esta sección; no es un ranking de qué caso prevalece.

Explore la ley

Este artículo también se apoya en estas leyes y capítulos (abriendo en su primera sección): Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 347: DOGS AND CATS § 347.01 (OWNER'S LIABILITY; PENALTY)

Leyes relacionadas para lectura adicional; no forman parte de las citas de este artículo.

Busque en nuestro registro completo de la ley de EE. UU.: 2.1 millones de secciones, todos los estados y la ley federal

Fuentes y referencias

  1. Minn. Stat. \u00a7 347.22 - Damages, Owner Liable(revisor.mn.gov).gov
  2. Minn. Stat. \u00a7 347.50 - Dangerous Dog Definitions(revisor.mn.gov).gov
  3. Minn. Stat. \u00a7 347.51 - Dangerous Dogs; Registration(revisor.mn.gov).gov
  4. Minnesota Statutes Chapter 347 - Dogs and Cats(revisor.mn.gov).gov
  5. Minn. Stat. \u00a7 541.05 - Six-Year Limitations(revisor.mn.gov).gov
  6. Minn. Stat. \u00a7 609.226 - Harm Caused by Dog(revisor.mn.gov).gov
  7. Minnesota Dangerous Dog Registration(mn.gov).gov
Compartir: