咬伤之外的正义：当不牵绳的狗撞倒路人时如何起诉？

在加州，关于犬只责任的讨论通常集中在“咬伤”上。但由邓洪律师（Daniel Deng）领军的邓洪律师事务所深知，一只 70 磅重的拉布拉多犬冲向路人所造成的伤害，往往不亚于咬伤。在 2026 年，随着南加州公园和人行道日益拥挤，被狗撞倒导致的受伤屡见不鲜。即便没有牙印，您依然可以利用“本身过失”（Negligence Per Se）原则寻求司法公正。

为什么“严格责任”不适用？（以及应对方案）

正如我们在之前的文章中所述，加州《民事法典》第 3342 条的“严格责任”仅限于“咬伤”。如果狗只是把你扑倒、抓伤或导致你摔倒，该法律并不适用。此时，我们需要转向“普通疏忽”和“本身过失”。

本身过失：当地控犬条例的力量

在圣盖博谷（SGV）的大多数城市（如阿罕布拉、蒙特利公园），都有严格的牵绳令。根据《加州证据法典》第 669 条，如果狗主人违反了牵绳令并导致他人受伤，法律将直接推定主人存在过失。

在 2026 年的索赔中，我们只需证明：

违规行为： 主人在强制牵绳的公共区域放任犬只乱跑。

由此产生的伤害： 因为没牵绳，狗冲撞或扑向路人导致其摔倒。

实际损害： 摔倒导致了骨折、头部创伤或其他身体损伤。

“热情过头”也是过错

如果没有牵绳令怎么办？您依然可以根据普通法疏忽起诉。加州法院认为，如果主人知道自己的狗有扑人的习惯（即便狗只是“想找人玩”），主人也必须承担责任。在法律眼中，一只“过于热情”的大型犬就是一个可以预见的危险源。

邓洪律师事务所：您的正义坚盾

我们提供“无畏的辩护”。保险公司常把这类事故轻描淡写为“意外”，甚至反过来指责受害者“自己没站稳”。

母语服务： 我们用您的母语解析复杂的《证据法典》，确保沟通无碍。

强力取证： 我们会调取监控、寻找目击者并核对当地法令，确保护主无法推卸责任。

扞卫权益： “为社区争取公正”意味着无论伤害来自利齿还是脚爪，我们都将为您追究到底。

如果您在公园或街道被不牵绳的狗撞伤，请立即联系邓洪律师。

Beyond the Bite: Suing for Injuries When an Unleashed Dog Knocks You Down

In California, the conversation around dog liability usually centers on bites. However, at Deng Law Center, led by community advocate Daniel Deng, we know that a 70-pound Labrador charging at a pedestrian can be just as devastating as a bite. In 2026, with Southern California's parks and sidewalks more crowded than ever, "knock-down" injuries are on the rise. If an unleashed dog caused you to fall, you are not out of luck just because there are no teeth marks. You have a "Bridge to a Fair Trial" through the doctrine of Negligence Per Se.

Why Strict Liability Doesn't Apply (And Why That’s Okay)

As discussed in our previous briefing, California Civil Code § 3342 is a "Strict Liability" statute, but it is narrow: it applies only to bites. If a dog knocks you over, scratches you, or causes you to trip, you cannot use that specific law. Instead, we pivot to General Negligence and Negligence Per Se.

Negligence Per Se: The Power of Local Leash Laws

Most municipalities in the San Gabriel Valley—including Alhambra, Monterey Park, and Arcadia—have strict leash ordinances. Under California Evidence Code § 669, if a dog owner violates a local leash law and that violation leads to an injury, the owner is presumed to be negligent.

To win a 2026 knock-down case, we demonstrate:

The Violation: The owner allowed the dog to be off-leash in a public area where leashes are required.

The Resulting Harm: The dog’s unleashed state allowed it to run into, jump on, or frighten a pedestrian, causing a fall.

The Injury: The fall resulted in broken bones, head trauma, or other physical damage.

The "Exuberant Dog" Rule

What if there is no leash law? You can still sue under Common Law Negligence. California courts have long held that if an owner knows their dog has a habit of jumping on people—even if the dog is "just being friendly"—the owner is liable if that behavior causes a fall. In the eyes of the law, a "playful" 80-pound dog is a foreseeable hazard.

Why Choose Deng Law Center?

We are "Protective & Bold." Insurance companies often try to dismiss knock-down injuries as "accidents" or blame the pedestrian for "tripping." We speak your language and act as your bridge to a fair trial. We use surveillance footage, witness statements, and local ordinances to hold negligent owners accountable. At Deng Law Center, we ensure that the "Voice of the People" is heard, regardless of whether the injury came from a tooth or a paw.

Legal Disclaimer: Information provided is for educational purposes and does not constitute an attorney-client relationship. Comparative negligence may apply if the victim was running or acting in a way that contributed to the fall.