B. Burden of Proof

The victim has two main things to prove in an animal attack. The first is who the owners and keepers of the animal(s) are, and secondly, that they were negligent. The owner may be negligent either by not restraining the animal properly or because they knew, or should have known it was possible for the animal to be dangerous. Victims may recover damages without proving the animal was previously dangerous if it was found that the owner was negligent by not having the animal properly restrained. If the owner knew of the potential danger of the animal to others and did not use common sense precautions to prevent injuries to others, the owner may be found negligent under any circumstances. Uncontrollable animals must be secured away from the public. A person may be a victim from being frightened by an animal, causing a slip or fall, not being actually touched by the animal. This type of victim needs to be able to prove that the animal's actions caused the injuries by its actions.

Owners of animals considered to be wild, including those in habitats, exhibits and zoos, are usually held strictly liable for any harm resulting from escaped animals. These animals may not be known to be normally dangerous while in captivity, yet it is recognized that they may return to behavior natural in the wild if they escape. If the animal is confined correctly on the owner's property, the owner may not be liable due to a victim's inappropriate actions that lead to an injury. A competent personal injury attorney will be able to assist in determining the owner's liability, as each case is dependant on the various factors.
Provocation of animals in any way may lead to denial of any claim for injuries, particularly if they know the animal is dangerous or have been warned of possible danger. Trespassers also may not be able to obtain positive judgments in many states, particularly if there are warning signs on the property.

D. Determining Fault

There are several items that are needed to prove legal responsibility for personal injury cases. These include that the owner and/or keeper of the animal knowingly failed to constrain the potentially dangerous animal and the injuries were due to this negligence. Victims also need to show the nature and extent of their physical and psychological injuries. It is still possible to receive some compensation even if there is a possibility the victim partially caused the injury. If a third party was responsible for the injuries, it is also possible in most states to receive compensation from them.