EnglishEspañol
Florida flag

Florida

Leyes sobre Mordeduras de Perro en Florida: Responsabilidad y Derechos de las Víctimas

Por Equipo Editorial de Recording LawRevisado 9 de agosto de 202616 min de lectura
Leyes sobre Mordeduras de Perro en Florida: Responsabilidad y Derechos de las Víctimas

Preguntas frecuentes

¿Es Florida un estado de responsabilidad objetiva para las mordeduras de perro?

Sí. Según el Fla. Stat. § 767.04, los dueños de perros son objetivamente responsables por las lesiones de mordedura sin importar si sabían que el perro era peligroso. La víctima solo necesita probar que el demandado era dueño del perro, que el perro la mordió, y que estaba legalmente presente en el lugar.

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

Tiene 2 años a partir de la fecha de la mordedura según el Fla. Stat. § 95.11(5)(a). Este plazo se redujo de 4 a 2 años mediante la HB 837, vigente desde el 24 de marzo de 2023. No cumplir con este plazo impide permanentemente su reclamo.

¿Puede un letrero de 'Perro Bravo' proteger a un dueño de perro de la responsabilidad en Florida?

Posiblemente, sí. Según el Fla. Stat. § 767.04, un dueño que exhiba un letrero prominente y legible con las palabras 'Perro Bravo' en su propiedad puede evitar la responsabilidad objetiva. Sin embargo, esta defensa no se aplica si la víctima es menor de 6 años o si la negligencia del dueño contribuyó a la mordedura.

¿Qué sucede si tuve parte de la culpa de la mordedura de perro?

Florida aplica la negligencia comparativa modificada. Si tuvo 50% o menos de responsabilidad, su indemnización se reduce según su porcentaje de responsabilidad. Si tuvo 51% o más de responsabilidad (por ejemplo, al provocar gravemente al perro), queda completamente impedido de recibir cualquier indemnización según la HB 837.

¿Qué es la Ley Pam Rock y cómo afecta a los dueños de perros peligrosos?

La Ley Pam Rock (SB 572), firmada en mayo de 2025 y vigente desde el 1 de julio de 2025, aumentó las sanciones para los dueños de perros clasificados como peligrosos. Si un perro clasificado como peligroso causa una lesión grave o la muerte, el dueño ahora enfrenta un delito grave de segundo grado (hasta 15 años de prisión) en lugar de un delito grave de tercer grado. La ley también convierte en delito grave de tercer grado la remoción de un microchip de un perro peligroso.

¿Lesionado en Florida? 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 Florida. La mayoría trabaja por honorarios contingentes, así que no hay costo inicial.

Actualizaciones

Corrected a fabricated quotation of Fla. Stat. 767.01 (the statute covers damage to people and domestic animals/livestock, not property) and re-pinned the 2-year dog bite statute of limitations from 95.11(3)(a) (paternity) to the correct 95.11(5)(a) (negligence) in three places.

Ley aplicable revisada en busca de cambios recientes

La ley detrás de este artículo

Este artículo se apoya en 9 disposiciones legales conservadas en nuestro propio registro jurídico, cada una obtenida de la fuente oficial. Toque una sección para leer el texto vigente.

Florida Statutes

§ 767.01Dog owner’s liability for damages to persons, domestic animals, or livestock.Vigente
(1) A dog owner is liable for any damage done by the owner’s dog to a person or to any animal included in the definitions of “domestic animal” and “livestock” as provided by s. 585.01. (2) If a dog owner has knowledge of the dog’s dangerous propensities, the owner must securely confine the dog in a proper enclosure as defined in s. 767.11.

Texto oficial (extracto) · al 2026-07-28 · Lea la sección completa en leg.state.fl.us

Citada en 22 opiniones judiciales1960s: 21970s: 71980s: 81990s: 22000s: 3Aplicada por un tribunal por última vez: 2008

Casos destacados: Brandeis v. Felcher (District Court of Appeal of Florida 1968, 211 So. 2d 606) · Mapoles v. Mapoles (District Court of Appeal of Florida 1977, 350 So. 2d 1137) · Smith v. Allison (District Court of Appeal of Florida 1976, 332 So. 2d 631)

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

§ 767.04Dog owner’s liability for damages to persons bitten.Vigentecitada en 2 de nuestros artículos
The owner of any dog that bites any person while such person is on or in a public place, or lawfully on or in a private place, including the property of the owner of the dog, is liable for damages suffered by persons bitten, regardless of the former viciousness of the dog or the owners’ knowledge of such viciousness. However, any negligence on the part of the person bitten that is a proximate cause of the biting incident reduces the liability of the owner of the dog by the percentage that the bitten person’s negligence contributed to the biting incident. A person is lawfully upon private property of such owner within the meaning of this act when the person is on such property in the performance of any duty imposed upon him or her by the laws of this state or by the laws or postal regulations of the United States, or when the person is on such property upon invitation, expressed or implied, of the owner.

Texto oficial (extracto) · al 2026-07-28 · Lea la sección completa en leg.state.fl.us

Citada en 40 opiniones judiciales1960s: 11970s: 91980s: 191990s: 62000s: 12010s: 22020s: 2Aplicada por un tribunal por última vez: 2022

Casos destacados: Carroll v. Moxley (Supreme Court of Florida 1970, 241 So. 2d 681) · Belcher Yacht, Inc. v. Stickney (Supreme Court of Florida 1984, 450 So. 2d 1111) · Donner v. Arkwright-Boston Manufacturers Mutual Insurance (Supreme Court of Florida 1978, 358 So. 2d 21)

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

§ 767.11Definitions.Vigente
As used in this part, unless the context clearly requires otherwise:(1) “Animal control authority” means an entity acting alone or in concert with other local governmental units and authorized by them to enforce the animal control laws of the city, county, or state. In those areas not served by an animal control authority, the sheriff shall carry out the duties of the animal control authority under this part. (2) “Animal control officer” means any individual employed, contracted with, or appointed by the animal control authority for the purpose of aiding in the enforcement of this part or any other law or ordinance relating to the licensure of animals, control of animals, or seizure and impoundment of animals and includes any state or local law enforcement officer or other employee whose duties in whole or in part include assignments that involve the seizure and impoundment of an animal.

Texto oficial (extracto) · al 2026-07-28 · Lea la sección completa en leg.state.fl.us

Citada en 1 opiniones judicialesAplicada por un tribunal por última vez: 2008

Casos destacados: Trammell v. Thomason (District Court, M.D. Florida 2008, 559 F. Supp. 2d 1281)

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

§ 767.12Classification of dogs as dangerous; owner requirements; penalty.Vigente
(1) An animal control authority shall investigate reported incidents involving any dog that may be dangerous and, if possible, shall interview the owner and require a sworn affidavit from any person, including any animal control officer or enforcement officer, desiring to have a dog classified as dangerous.(a) An animal that is the subject of a dangerous dog investigation and that has killed a human being or has bitten a human being and left a bite mark that scores 5 or higher on the Dunbar bite scale must be immediately confiscated by an animal control authority; placed in quarantine, if necessary, for the proper length of time; impounded; and held. The animal must be held pending the outcome of the investigation and any hearings or appeals related to the dangerous dog classification or any penalty imposed under this section. If the dog is to be destroyed, the dog may not be destroyed while an appeal is pending. The owner is responsible for payment of all boarding costs and other fees as may be required to humanely and safely keep the animal pending any hearing or appeal.

Texto oficial (extracto) · al 2026-07-28 · Lea la sección completa en leg.state.fl.us

Citada en 3 opiniones judicialesAplicada por un tribunal por última vez: 2007

Casos destacados: County of Pasco v. Riehl (Supreme Court of Florida 1994, 19 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 183) · Marion County v. Grunnah (District Court of Appeal of Florida 2007, 962 So. 2d 931)

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

§ 767.13Attack or bite by dangerous dog; penalties; confiscation; destruction.Vigente
(1) If a dog that has previously been declared dangerous attacks or bites a person or a domestic animal without provocation, the owner commits a misdemeanor of the first degree, punishable as provided in s. 775.082 or s. 775.083. The dangerous dog must be immediately confiscated by an animal control authority; placed in quarantine, if necessary, for the proper length of time; impounded; and held for 10 business days after the owner is given written notification under s. 767.12, and thereafter destroyed in an expeditious and humane manner. The owner may request a hearing under s. 767.12 during the 10 business days after such notification. The owner is responsible for payment of all boarding costs and other fees as may be required to humanely and safely keep the animal during any appeal procedure. (2) If a dog that has previously been declared dangerous attacks and causes severe injury to or death of any human, the owner commits a felony of the second degree, punishable as provided in s. 775.082, s. 775.083, or s. 775.084.

Texto oficial (extracto) · al 2026-07-28 · Lea la sección completa en leg.state.fl.us

Citada en 2 opiniones judicialesAplicada por un tribunal por última vez: 2010

Casos destacados: State v. Nowlin (District Court of Appeal of Florida 2010, 50 So. 3d 79) · City of Ocala v. Green (District Court of Appeal of Florida 2008, 988 So. 2d 114)

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

§ 767.14Additional local restrictions authorized.Vigente
This act does not limit any local government or public housing authority from adopting an ordinance or a policy, respectively, to address the safety and welfare concerns caused by attacks on persons or domestic animals; placing further restrictions or additional requirements on owners of dogs that have bitten or attacked persons or domestic animals; or developing procedures and criteria for the implementation of this act, provided that no such regulation is specific to breed, weight, or size and that the provisions of this act are not lessened by such additional regulations or requirements.

Texto oficial (extracto) · al 2026-07-28 · Lea la sección completa en leg.state.fl.us

Citada en 1 opiniones judicialesAplicada por un tribunal por última vez: 2011

Casos destacados: Hoesch v. Broward County (District Court of Appeal of Florida 2011, 53 So. 3d 1177)

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

§ 828.30Rabies vaccination of dogs, cats, and ferrets.Vigente
(1)(a) All dogs, cats, and ferrets 4 months of age or older must be vaccinated by a licensed veterinarian or a person authorized under paragraph (b) against rabies with a vaccine that is licensed by the United States Department of Agriculture for use in those species. (b) Acting under the indirect supervision of a veterinarian, an employee, an agent, or a contractor of a county or municipal animal control authority or sheriff may vaccinate against rabies dogs, cats, and ferrets that are in the custody of an animal control authority or a sheriff and which will be transferred, rescued, fostered, adopted, or reclaimed by the owner. The supervising veterinarian assumes responsibility for any person vaccinating animals at his or her direction or under his or her direct or indirect supervision. As used in this paragraph, the term “indirect supervision” means that the supervising veterinarian is required to be available for consultation through telecommunications but is not required to be physically present during such consultation. (c) The owner of every dog, cat, and ferret shall have the animal revaccinated 12 months after the initial vaccination.

Texto oficial (extracto) · al 2026-07-28 · Lea la sección completa en leg.state.fl.us

Citada en 1 opiniones judicialesAplicada por un tribunal por última vez: 2015

Casos destacados: Alboniga v. School Board of Broward County Florida (District Court, S.D. Florida 2015, 87 F. Supp. 3d 1319)

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

§ 95.051When limitations tolled.Vigentecitada en 2 de nuestros artículos
(1) The running of the time under any statute of limitations except ss. 95.281, 95.35, and 95.36 is tolled by:(a) Absence from the state of the person to be sued. (b) Use by the person to be sued of a false name that is unknown to the person entitled to sue so that process cannot be served on the person to be sued. (c) Concealment in the state of the person to be sued so that process cannot be served on him or her. (d) The adjudicated incapacity, before the cause of action accrued, of the person entitled to sue. In any event, the action must be begun within 7 years after the act, event, or occurrence giving rise to the cause of action. (e) Voluntary payments by the alleged father of the child in paternity actions during the time of the payments. (f) The payment of any part of the principal or interest of any obligation or liability founded on a written instrument. (g) The pendency of any arbitral proceeding pertaining to a dispute that is the subject of the action. (h) The period of an intervening bankruptcy tolls the expiration period of a tax certificate under s. 197.482 and any proceeding or process under chapter 197.

Texto oficial (extracto) · al 2026-07-28 · Lea la sección completa en leg.state.fl.us

Citada en 75 opiniones judiciales1970s: 21980s: 41990s: 132000s: 212010s: 182020s: 17Aplicada por un tribunal por última vez: 2026

Casos destacados: Major League Baseball v. Morsani (Supreme Court of Florida 2001, 26 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 465) · Landers v. Milton (Supreme Court of Florida 1979, 370 So. 2d 368) · Totura & Co., Inc. v. Williams (Supreme Court of Florida 2000, 754 So. 2d 671)

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

§ 95.11Limitations other than for the recovery of real property.Vigentecitada en 12 de nuestros artículos
Actions other than for recovery of real property shall be commenced as follows:(1) WITHIN TWENTY YEARS.—An action on a judgment or decree of a court of record in this state. (2) WITHIN FIVE YEARS.—(a) An action on a judgment or decree of any court, not of record, of this state or any court of the United States, any other state or territory in the United States, or a foreign country. (b) A legal or equitable action on a contract, obligation, or liability founded on a written instrument, except for an action to enforce a claim against a payment bond, which shall be governed by the applicable provisions of paragraph (6)(e), s. 255.05(10), s. 337.18(1), or s. 713.23(1)(e), and except for an action for a deficiency judgment governed by paragraph (6)(g). (c) An action to foreclose a mortgage. (d) An action alleging a willful violation of s. 448.110. (e) Notwithstanding paragraph (b), an action for breach of a property insurance contract, with the period running from the date of loss. (3) WITHIN FOUR YEARS.—(a) An action relating to the determination of paternity, with the time running from the date the child reaches the age of majority.

Texto oficial (extracto) · al 2026-07-28 · Lea la sección completa en leg.state.fl.us

Citada en 698 opiniones judiciales1940s: 21950s: 41960s: 141970s: 371980s: 911990s: 952000s: 912010s: 1632020s: 201Aplicada por un tribunal por última vez: 2026

Casos destacados: Merkle v. Robinson (Supreme Court of Florida 1999, 737 So. 2d 540) · Foley v. Morris (District Court of Appeal of Florida 1976, 325 So. 2d 37) · State ex rel. Gerstein v. Hialeah Race Course, Inc. (Supreme Court of Florida 1971, 245 So. 2d 53)

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

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. Fla. Stat. § 767.04 - Responsabilidad del dueño del perro por daños a personas mordidas(leg.state.fl.us).gov
  2. Fla. Stat. § 767.01 - Daños causados por perros; responsabilidad del dueño(leg.state.fl.us).gov
  3. Fla. Stat. § 767.11 - Definiciones (Perros Peligrosos)(leg.state.fl.us).gov
  4. Fla. Stat. § 767.12 - Clasificación de perros como peligrosos(leg.state.fl.us).gov
  5. Fla. Stat. § 767.13 - Ataque o mordedura de un perro peligroso; sanciones(leg.state.fl.us).gov
  6. Fla. Stat. § 767.14 - Preferencia estatal sobre la regulación local de perros(leg.state.fl.us).gov
  7. Fla. Stat. § 95.11 - Plazo de prescripción para lesiones personales(leg.state.fl.us).gov
  8. HB 837 (2023) - Ley de Reforma de Responsabilidad Civil de Florida(flsenate.gov).gov
  9. SB 572 / Ley Pam Rock (2025) - Perros Peligrosos(flsenate.gov).gov
  10. SB 942 (2023) - Derogación de la legislación específica por raza(flsenate.gov).gov
  11. Fla. Stat. § 828.30 - Requisito de vacunación contra la rabia(leg.state.fl.us).gov
  12. Fla. Stat. Capítulo 767 - Daños Causados por Perros; Perros Peligrosos (capítulo completo)(leg.state.fl.us).gov
Compartir: