§ 22-358 — Killing of dogs doing damage. Restraint or disposal orders. Notice. Seizure. Pre-appeal meeting. Appeal of order to the Superior Court. Complaints by persons sustaining damage by biting or attacking dog to poultry, ratite, domestic rabbit, animal or livestock. Investigation. Orders. Exemptions.

Connecticut § 22-358

• Jurisdiction: Connecticut
• Title 22: Agriculture. Domestic Animals
• Ch. 435: Dogs and Other Companion Animals. Kennels and Pet Shops

Text

(a) Any owner or keeper of any animal or poultry, or an agent of such owner or keeper, or any animal control officer appointed pursuant to section 22-328, 22-331 or 22-331a, or any police officer, including a state police officer, may kill any dog while the dog is in the act of biting, attacking or pursuing any such animal or poultry of the owner or keeper. Any owner, keeper, animal control officer or police officer who kills such dog shall make complaint concerning the circumstances of the attack to any animal control officer appointed pursuant to section 22-331 or 22-331a of the town where such attack occurred. The animal control officer to whom such complaint is made shall investigate the circumstances of the attack set forth in the complaint and report on the circumstances of the attack to the Chief State Animal Control Officer, appointed pursuant to section 22-328. (b) Any person who is protecting himself or herself or another person or animal from physical harm while being bitten or attacked by a dog, cat or other animal when such person is not upon the premises of the owner or keeper of such dog, cat or other animal may kill such dog, cat or other animal during such attack. Any person who kills such animal shall make complaint concerning the circumstances of the attack to any animal control officer appointed pursuant to section 22-331 or 22-331a of the town where such attack occurred. The animal control officer to whom such complaint is made shall investigate the circumstances of the attack set forth in the complaint and report on the circumstances of the attack to the Chief State Animal Control Officer, appointed pursuant to section 22-328 . (c) In the interest of public health and safety, if after investigation, any animal control officer appointed pursuant to section 22-328 , 22-331 or 22-331a in the municipality or region in which an alleged dog bite or attack occurs determines that a person has in fact been bitten or attacked by a dog, such animal control officer may make any order concerning the restraint or disposal of such biting or attacking dog as is necessary to protect public health and safety. In determining the type of order to be issued or conditions of restraint to be imposed, the animal control officer shall consider factors that include, but need not be limited to: (1) The ability of the owner or keeper of the dog, if any, to control the animal; (2) the severity of injury inflicted on a person by the biting or attacking dog; (3) the viciousness of the bite or attack; (4) any history of past bites or attacks by the dog; (5) whether the bite or attack occurred at a location that is off of the property of the owner or keeper of the dog; (6) whether the biting or attacking dog was provoked; and (7) whether the biting or attacking dog was protecting its owner or keeper from physical harm. (d) Any dog, while biting, attacking or pursuing deer, may be killed by any animal control officer appointed pursuant to section 22-328 , 22-331 or 22-331a , or by a conservation officer or special conservation officer appointed by the Commissioner of Energy and Environmental Protection, or by any police officer, including a state police officer. The owner or keeper of any dog found biting, attacking or pursuing a deer shall be guilty of a class D misdemeanor. (e) Any person who kills any dog, cat or other animal in accordance with the provisions of this section shall not be held criminally or civilly liable therefor. (f) Repealed by P.A. 19-197 , S. 1. (g) Repealed by P.A. 05-175 , S. 24. (h) The following shall apply to any order issued pursuant to this section: (1) In the interest of public health and safety, and the health and safety of animals, whenever an order issued pursuant to this section requires the restraint of an animal, the order shall be effective upon its issuance and shall remain in effect during any appeal of such order; (2) In the interest of public health and safety, and the health and safety of animals, whenever an order issued pursuant to this section requires the disposal of an animal, the issuing officer shall take physical custody and retain possession of the animal subject to the order during any appeal of such order; (3) Not later than twenty-four hours after the issuance of any order issued pursuant to this section, a copy of the order shall be delivered to the owner or keeper of the biting or attacking animal, and the person bitten or attacked, or to the owner or keeper of an animal which has been bitten or attacked. The order shall also include a statement informing the owner or keeper of the biting or attacking animal of their right to pursue an appeal of the order; (4) Not later than fifteen days after the date of an order issued pursuant to this section by any animal control officer appointed pursuant to section 22-331 or 22-331a , the municipality in which the attack occurred shall offer in writing to the dog owner a pre-appeal meeting, which may include the owner or keeper of the animal subject to the order and the person who was bitten or attacked, or the owner or keeper of an animal which has been bitten or attacked, to determine if the order is in dispute. At such meeting the owner or keeper of the animal subject to the order and their legal counsel, if any, the animal control officer issuing the order and the animal control officer's appointing authority, or their designee, may stipulate to an alternate order. All settlement discussions that occur during the pre-appeal meeting shall be confidential and protected from disclosure under state law; (5) A statement of the conclusion of the pre-appeal meeting, including only the names of the attending parties, the date of the prehearing meeting and whether the order was modified, shall be provided by the municipality to the owner or keeper of the animal subject to the order, and the victim or the owner or keeper of an animal which has been bitten or attacked, not later than twenty-four hours after the conclusion of the pre-appeal meeting. If a pre-appeal meeting statement is issued pursuant to this subdivision, then the time to appeal to the Superior Court shall run from the date of the issuance of such statement. If there is no pre-appeal meeting, then the time to appeal to the Superior Court runs from the date of the order; (6) Any person aggrieved by any order issued under the provisions of this section by the commissioner or any animal control officer appointed pursuant to section 22-328 , 22-331 or 22-331a , may appeal to the Superior Court of the judicial district in which such aggrieved person is a resident, provided such appeal is made not later than forty-five days after issuance of the order. If the person aggrieved by an order engages in a pre-appeal meeting under subdivision (4) of this subsection, then the time to appeal to the Superior Court shall run from the date of the statement issued pursuant to subdivision (5) of this subsection. The pre-appeal meeting shall be concluded for purposes of this section not later than thirty days after the date of the order; (7) The owner or keeper of any animal subject to an order issued pursuant to this section shall pay all fees as set forth in section 22-333 . If an owner or keeper of an animal subject to an order issued pursuant to this section fails to comply with any restraint order made pursuant to this section, any animal control officer appointed pursuant to section 22-328 , 22-331 or 22-331a may seize the animal prior to or during the pendency of an appeal and until completion of an appeal of such order to ensure such compliance and the owner shall be responsible for any expenses resulting from such seizure; (8) Once the order becomes a final order or judgment, the order is enforceable on a state-wide basis and any animal control officer appointed pursuant to section 22-328 , 22-331 or 22-331a shall have the authority to enforce the final order or judgment; and (9) Any owner or keeper of an animal subject to a final order or judgment issued pursuant to this subsection who fails to comply with a final order or judgment shall be guilty of a class D misdemeanor. (i) A person who sustains damage or physical injury to such person's poultry, ratite, domestic rabbit, animal or livestock as defined in section 22-278 , by a biting or attacking dog shall make complaint concerning circumstances of the bite or attack by such dog on any such animal or livestock to the animal control officer appointed pursuant to section 22-331 or 22-331a of the town in which the bite or attack occurred. The animal control officer to whom such complaint is made shall investigate the circumstances of the attack set forth in the complaint and report on the circumstances of the attack to the Chief State Animal Control Officer, appointed pursuant to section 22-328 . An officer to whom such complaint is made shall immediately investigate such complaint. In the interest of public health and safety, and the health and safety of animals, if after investigation, any animal control officer appointed pursuant to section 22-331 or 22-331a in the municipality or region in which an alleged dog bite or attack occurs determines that an animal has in fact been bitten or attacked by a dog, such animal control officer, or the Chief State Animal Control Officer appointed pursuant to section 22-328 , may make any order concerning the restraint or disposal of such biting or attacking dog as is necessary to protect public health and safety and the health and safety of animals. In determining the type of order to be issued or conditions of restraint to be imposed, the animal control officer shall consider factors that include, but need not be limited to: (1) The ability of the owner or keeper to control the dog; (2) the severity of injury inflicted by the biting or attacking dog; (3) the viciousness of the bite or attack; (4) any history of past bites or attacks by the dog; (5) whether the bite or attack occurred at a location that is off of the property of the owner or keeper of the biting or attacking dog, provided the animal attacked was under the control of animal's owner or keeper, or the animal attacked was on property of the owner or keeper; (6) whether the biting or attacking dog was provoked; and (7) whether the biting or attacking dog was protecting its owner or keeper from physical harm. (j) Any dog or other animal owned by the United States military, a law enforcement agency of the United States or a law enforcement agency of this state or any of its political subdivisions shall be exempt from the provisions of this section when such dog or other animal is owned by or in the custody and control of such agency and under the direct supervision, care and control of an assigned handler, is currently vaccinated for rabies and is subject to routine veterinary care. Any service animal owned by or in the custody and control of a person with a disability shall be exempt from the provisions of this section when such service animal is under the direct supervision, care and control of such person, is currently vaccinated for rabies and is subject to routine veterinary care. As used in this subsection, “service animal” and “disability” have the same meanings as provided in section 22-345 .

Legislative History

(1949 Rev., S. 3405; 1953, S. 1843d; 1963, P.A. 613, S. 28; February, 1965, P.A. 23, S. 1; 1969, P.A. 35; 81, S. 4; 1971, P.A. 725; P.A. 73-28; P.A. 79-290, S. 4; P.A. 83-71, S. 1; P.A. 84-546, S. 67, 173; P.A. 85-57, S. 1, 2; P.A. 89-161, S. 6, 7; P.A. 91-46, S. 6, 12; 91-59, S. 16; 91-215, S. 2; P.A. 92-77, S. 1, 5; P.A. 93-381, S. 9, 39; P.A. 95-257, S. 12, 21, 58; P.A. 98-12, S. 15, 22; P.A. 00-88, S. 1; P.A. 02-14, S. 2; P.A. 04-145, S. 3; P.A. 05-175, S. 24; P.A. 07-59, S. 1; P.A. 08-124, S. 8; P.A. 11-80, S. 1; 11-182, S. 1; P.A. 12-21, S. 1; 12-80, S. 130; P.A. 19-197, S. 1; P.A. 24-108, S. 28.) History: 1963 act included references to regional wardens, substituted quarantine in veterinary hospital or kennel for quarantine “in close confinement” in Subsec. (b) and doubled boarding fee and in Subsec. (c) empowered conservation officers to kill dogs worrying or pursuing deer and added provision re penalty to be imposed on the owner or keeper of such a dog; 1965 act revised Subsec. (b) so that quarantine provisions apply to attacks not on dog owner's premises and provisions re commissioner's orders for restraint or disposal of dog apply to attacks on owner's premises, reversing previous applications of provisions; 1969 acts replaced references to dog wardens with references to canine control officers where necessary and in Subsec. (b) allowed quarantine of dog on owner's premises when attack occurred on those premises; 1971 act amended Subsec. (c) to allow resident state policemen to kill dog worrying or pursuing deer; P.A. 73-28 doubled boarding fee in Subsec. (b); P.A. 79-290 required notification of person bitten when order given re restraint, disposal or quarantine of dog and raised boarding fee from $2 to $5 per day; P.A. 83-71 amended Subsec. (b) to add provision specifying criteria for exemption of police dogs from quarantine requirements; P.A. 84-546 made technical changes to section; P.A. 85-57 added Subsecs. (c) and (d) to restore language inadvertently omitted from the 1985 revision; P.A. 89-161 amended Subsec. (b) to add the language concerning the seizure of dogs whose owners fail to comply with quarantine or restraining orders; P.A. 91-46 added Subsec. (e) concerning euthanasia and examination of potentially rabid dogs; P.A. 91-59 replaced references to “warden” and “regional canine control officer” with references to “municipal animal control officer” and “regional animal control officer”; P.A. 91-215 rephrased Subsec. (b) to require that dog attacks be reported and divided Subsec. (b) into Subsecs. (b) and (c) and changed subsequent Subsec. designators accordingly; P.A. 92-77 amended section to apply to cats and other animals, amended Subsecs. (a) and (d) to authorize police officers and state police to kill dogs observed pursuing certain animals and made technical changes; P.A. 93-381 replaced department of health services with department of public health and addiction services, effective July 1, 1993; P.A. 95-257 replaced Commissioner and Department of Public Health and Addiction Services with Commissioner and Department of Public Health, effective July 1, 1995; P.A. 98-12 changed “canine control officer” to “animal control officer”, effective July 1, 1998; P.A. 00-88 amended Subsec. (c) by increasing the fine from $25 to $250 and making technical changes for the purposes of gender neutrality; P.A. 02-14 amended Subsec. (c) by requiring owner to pay all fees set forth in Sec. 22-333 rather than $5 per day plus other legal fees due, effective July 1, 2002; P.A. 04-145 added Subsec. (g) requiring commissioner to adopt regulations re expedited appeal and hearing process re restraint or disposal of dogs, effective May 21, 2004; P.A. 05-175 repealed Subsec. (g), effective July 1, 2005; P.A. 07-59 added Subsec. (h) re complaint and appeal process for person who sustains damage by dog to poultry, ratite, domestic rabbit, companion animal or livestock; P.A. 08-124 made technical changes in Subsec. (d), effective June 2, 2008; pursuant to P.A. 11-80, “Commissioner of Environmental Protection” was changed editorially by the Revisors to “Commissioner of Energy and Environmental Protection” in Subsec. (d), effective July 1, 2011; P.A. 11-182 amended Subsec. (c) by changing exemption requirement for dog owned by a police agency from being vaccinated annually to being currently vaccinated and added exemption for guide dog in the custody and control of a blind person or a person with a mobility impairment; P.A. 12-21 amended Subsec. (c) to provide that any order requiring restraint of an animal shall be effective upon its issuance and shall remain in effect during any appeal of such order to commissioner; P.A. 12-80 amended Subsec. (c) to change penalty from a fine of not more than $250 or imprisonment of not more than 30 days or both to a class D misdemeanor, amended Subsec. (d) to change penalty from a fine of not less than $25 or more than $200 or imprisonment of not more than 60 days or both to a class D misdemeanor, amended Subsec. (h) to change penalty from a fine of not more than $250 or imprisonment of not more than 30 days or both to a class D misdemeanor and made technical changes in Subsecs. (a) and (c); P.A. 19-197 amended Subsec. (c) to delete provisions re quarantine of dog, cat or other animal and repealed Subsec. (f) re euthanization of animal quarantined pursuant to Subsec. (c), effective July 1, 2019; P.A. 24-108 substantially revised Subsecs. (a) to (d) re relief available following damage to persons and property by biting or attacking dogs, cats or other animals, added new Subsec. (h) re issuance of orders by animal control officers, redesignated existing Subsec. (h) as Subsec. (i) and substantially revised provisions re injury to person or property from biting or attacking dog and added Subsec. (j) re exemptions from provisions of section for certain dogs and other animals. Previous statutes discussed. 74 C. 8. Whether dog is worrying sheep is a question of fact. 84 C. 640. Killing held unjustified. 139 C. 622. When a dog released by a municipality before the end of a 14-day quarantine period bites another person, the municipality may be sued for liability in nuisance. 167 C. 464. Cited. 17 CA 326. Animal control officer's acts or omissions in issuing and enforcing a restraint order under facts of case were discretionary and not ministerial. 150 CA 769. Dog must be pursuing or worrying fowl at the time he is killed; it is not enough that he has done so in the past. 18 CS 53. The fact that defendant, a dog warden, was prosecuted for cruelly beating or unjustifiably injuring dog, not for killing it, does not preclude him from claiming the benefit of section. 3 Conn. Cir. Ct. 62.