§PlainStatute

Personal Injury · Dog Bite Liability

Dog Bite Laws in New Hampshire

Whether New Hampshire holds a dog owner automatically liable, follows the one-bite rule, or takes a mixed approach, plus landlord liability and the main defenses.

Draft entry: classification pending source verificationStatute §466:19Source gencourt.state.nh.us
Dog-bite liability · New Hampshire
Strict liability
The owner is liable for any damage the dog causes, whether or not the owner knew the dog was dangerous, unless the person hurt was trespassing or committing another tort at the time.
BasisStatute
CoversAny injury
Landlord liable?Rarely
Statute§466:19

How liability works in New Hampshire

What the rule is, and what you must show.

What the victim must show
You were harmed by a dog you neither own nor keep, and you were not committing a trespass or other tort when it happened. You do not have to prove a prior bite, a vicious history, or any carelessness by the owner.

Landlords & defenses

Who else can be liable, and what defeats a claim.

Landlord liability
Generally no. RSA 466:19 fixes liability on the person who owns, keeps, or possesses the dog. A landlord who is not the keeper can be reached only through ordinary negligence, which requires actual knowledge the dog was dangerous plus the ability to remove it.
Main defenses
Victim was trespassingVictim was committing another tortNot the owner, keeper, or possessor

The statute is unusual in writing its main defense straight into the rule: recovery is barred if the injury happened while the victim was "engaged in the commission of a trespass or other tort."

The full picture, with the source

Every field, and any recent development.

Liability modelStrict liability
BasisStatute — N.H. Rev. Stat. Ann. §466:19
What it coversYou were harmed by a dog you neither own nor keep, and you were not committing a trespass or other tort when it happened. You do not have to prove a prior bite, a vicious history, or any carelessness by the owner.
LandlordGenerally no. RSA 466:19 fixes liability on the person who owns, keeps, or possesses the dog. A landlord who is not the keeper can be reached only through ordinary negligence, which requires actual knowledge the dog was dangerous plus the ability to remove it.
Main defensesVictim was trespassing · Victim was committing another tort · Not the owner, keeper, or possessor

What New Hampshire dog-bite victims get wrong

New Hampshire is a broad strict-liability state, and the word to notice is "damage," not "bite." RSA 466:19 lets anyone hurt by a dog they do not own or keep recover from the owner, keeper, or possessor, with no need to show the dog had ever been dangerous or that the owner did anything wrong. Because it reaches "damage" generally, it covers more than a bite: a dog that knocks someone down or startles them into a fall can fall inside the statute. The one built-in escape hatch is written into the rule itself. If you were trespassing or committing another tort when the dog hurt you, the statute does not help you. A parent or guardian answers under the section when the owner or keeper is a minor.

Common questions

Is New Hampshire a strict-liability state for dog bites?

Yes. Under RSA 466:19 the owner, keeper, or possessor is liable for damage the dog causes without any proof that the dog was known to be dangerous or that the owner was careless.

Does New Hampshire’s dog law cover more than bites?

Yes. The statute reaches "damage" caused by the dog, not just bites, so a knock-down or a fall triggered by the dog can be covered. New Hampshire courts have said the statute is not limited to an actual bite or direct physical contact.

What if I was trespassing when the dog hurt me in New Hampshire?

Then RSA 466:19 does not help you. The statute bars recovery when the damage was occasioned to a person who was engaged in the commission of a trespass or other tort.

Can I sue a landlord for a tenant’s dog bite in New Hampshire?

Generally only through ordinary negligence, not RSA 466:19, unless the landlord actually kept or possessed the dog. A negligence claim requires showing the landlord knew the dog was dangerous and could have removed it.

Primary source
N.H. Rev. Stat. Ann. §466:19
New Hampshire General Court — RSA 466:19 · gencourt.state.nh.us
Draft: pending editorial review
RSA 466:19 is a genuine strict-liability statute, and its text is confirmed verbatim across several sources, but the official gencourt.state.nh.us page sits behind a bot filter that blocked a direct fetch. Until a human opens the official page and confirms the wording by hand, this record ships as corroborated rather than statute. The classification (strict, broad) is not in doubt; only the verified byline is held back. Editorial standards →

Not legal advicePlainStatute provides plain-language summaries of public law for general information only. This is not legal advice. Statutes change; always confirm current requirements with the official source linked above before acting.

Dog-bite liability · other states