In strict liability cases involving pets, when can a defendant be held strictly liable for domestic animals?

In strict liability cases involving domestic animals, a defendant can be held strictly liable for the actions of their pet if that animal has a known propensity to cause harm. This is commonly understood through a principle known as the "one bite rule," which suggests that the owner is only liable for injuries caused by their pet if they had prior knowledge of the animal's dangerous behavior.

Choosing the option that states liability arises only after the pet has bitten someone captures the essence of how strict liability is typically allocated in these cases. An owner cannot generally be held liable for the first incident unless they were aware of the pet’s aggressive tendencies. Therefore, a pet owner who had no previous knowledge of their pet’s propensity to bite would not be considered strictly liable until after the animal has acted aggressively, such as in a biting instance.

This approach balances the owner's responsibilities with fair consideration of their limited knowledge about their pet's behavior until a significant incident occurs, aligning closely with the principles governing strict liability in tort law concerning animals.