Connecticut General Statutes
Chapter 435 - Dogs and Other Companion Animals. Kennels and Pet Shops
Section 22-358. - Killing of dogs doing damage. Restraint or disposal orders. Notice. Seizure. Euthanasia and examination of potentially rabid animals. Complaints by persons sustaining damage by dog to poultry, ratite, domestic rabbit, companion anim...

(a) Any owner or the agent of any owner of any domestic animal or poultry, or the Chief Animal Control Officer, any animal control officer, any municipal animal control officer, any regional animal control officer or any police officer or state policeman, may kill any dog which he observes pursuing or worrying any such domestic animal or poultry.

(b) Any person who is bitten, or who shows visible evidence of attack 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. Such person shall make complaint concerning the circumstances of the attack to the Chief Animal Control Officer, any animal control officer or the municipal animal control officer or regional animal control officer of the town wherein such dog, cat or other animal is owned or kept. Any such officer to whom such complaint is made shall immediately make an investigation of such complaint.
(c) The commissioner, the Chief Animal Control Officer, any animal control officer, any municipal animal control officer or any regional animal control officer may make any order concerning the restraint or disposal of any biting dog, cat or other animal as the commissioner or such officer deems necessary. Notice of any such order shall be given to the person bitten by such dog, cat or other animal within twenty-four hours. The owner of such animal shall pay all fees as set forth in section 22-333. Any owner or keeper of such dog, cat or other animal who fails to comply with such order shall be guilty of a class D misdemeanor. If an owner or keeper fails to comply with a restraining order made pursuant to this subsection, the Chief Animal Control Officer, any animal control officer, any municipal animal control officer or any regional animal control officer may seize the dog, cat or other animal to ensure such compliance and the owner or keeper shall be responsible for any expenses resulting from such seizure. Any person aggrieved by an order of any municipal animal control officer, the Chief Animal Control Officer, any animal control officer or any regional animal control officer may request a hearing before the commissioner within fourteen days of the issuance of such order. Any order issued pursuant to this section that requires the restraint of an animal shall be effective upon its issuance and shall remain in effect during any appeal of such order to the commissioner. After such hearing, the commissioner may affirm, modify or revoke such order as the commissioner deems proper. Any dog owned by a police agency of the state or any of its political subdivisions is exempt from the provisions of this subsection when such dog is under the direct supervision, care and control of an assigned police officer, is currently vaccinated and is subject to routine veterinary care. Any guide dog owned or in the custody and control of a blind person or a person with a mobility impairment is exempt from the provisions of this subsection when such guide dog is under the direct supervision, care and control of such person, is currently vaccinated and is subject to routine veterinary care.
(d) Any dog, while actually worrying or pursuing deer, may be killed by the Chief Animal Control Officer or an animal control officer or by a conservation officer or special conservation officer appointed by the Commissioner of Energy and Environmental Protection, or by any police officer or state policeman. The owner or keeper of any dog found worrying 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) A person who sustains damage by a dog to such person's poultry, ratite, domestic rabbit, companion animal or livestock as defined in section 22-278 shall make complaint concerning circumstances of the attack by such dog on any such animal or livestock to the Chief Animal Control Officer, any animal control officer or the municipal animal control officer or regional animal control officer of the town in which such dog is owned or kept. An officer to whom such complaint is made shall immediately investigate such complaint. If such officer finds that the complainant's animal has been bitten or attacked by a dog when the attacked animal was not on the premises of the owner or keeper of the attacking dog and provided the complainant's animal was under the control of the complainant or on the complainant's property, such officer, the commissioner, the Chief Animal Control Officer or any animal control officer may make any order concerning the restraint or disposal of such attacking dog as the commissioner or such officer deems necessary. An owner or keeper of such dog who fails to comply with such order shall be guilty of a class D misdemeanor. If the owner or keeper of such dog fails to comply with an order made pursuant to this subsection, the Chief Animal Control Officer or any animal control officer, municipal animal control officer or regional animal control officer may seize the dog to ensure such compliance, and the owner or keeper of such dog shall be responsible for any expenses resulting from such seizure. A person aggrieved by an order of the Chief Animal Control Officer or any animal control officer, municipal animal control officer or regional animal control officer made pursuant to this subsection may request a hearing before the commissioner not later than fourteen days after the issuance of such order. After such hearing, the commissioner may affirm, modify or revoke such order as the commissioner deems proper. A dog owned by a police agency of the state or any of its political subdivisions is exempt from the provisions of this section when such dog is under the direct supervision, care and control of an assigned police officer, has been vaccinated annually and is subject to routine veterinary care.
(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.)
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.
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.