CIV § 3340

California Civil Code § 3340 - Exemplary damages for wrongful injury to an animal

Civil Code § 3340 allows exemplary damages in California for wrongful injuries to animals committed willfully or by gross negligence, in disregard of humanity.

Official text CIV § 3340 — California

For wrongful injuries to animals being subjects of property, committed willfully or by gross negligence, in disregard of humanity, exemplary damages may be given.

Text as published in the 2026 snapshot of the code.

Source: Vaquill Open US Law, compiled from official state publishers (huggingface.co), reproduced under license CC BY 4.0.

Read this provision at the official source →

What it actually says

Section 3340 is one sentence and it exists to answer a problem the ordinary damages rules create. Animals are property in California law, so the default measure for injuring one is its value — a figure that is often derisory next to what the animal meant and what the treatment cost. This section provides that for wrongful injuries to animals being subjects of property, committed willfully or by gross negligence, in disregard of humanity, exemplary damages may be given.

Three qualifiers control it. The injury must be wrongful. The conduct must be willful or grossly negligent — ordinary carelessness is not enough, which is why a genuine accident with a car is not this section's territory. And the phrase "in disregard of humanity" adds a character to the conduct beyond mere fault: it points at cruelty or indifference to the animal's suffering rather than at a mistake.

What the section grants is exemplary damages, which are additional to and separate from compensation. It says "may be given", so it confers a power rather than an entitlement, and it does not fix an amount or a multiple. Compensation itself still comes from the general rules — § 3333 for the detriment caused, and the valuation provisions for property. Whether particular conduct was willful or grossly negligent in disregard of humanity, and what an award should be, are questions of fact and judgement to take to a lawyer with the veterinary records.

When it applies

  • A neighbour deliberately harms or poisons a pet
  • A dog left in conditions that cause serious avoidable suffering
  • An animal injured by someone acting in anger rather than by accident
  • A boarding kennel or groomer whose handling caused serious injury
  • A dog attacked and badly hurt by another dog whose owner encouraged it
  • You want to know why the vet bill is not the end of the claim

What this section does not say

  • It does not apply to an accident. Willfulness or gross negligence in disregard of humanity is required; ordinary carelessness, including most road accidents, does not reach it.
  • It is not the compensation. Exemplary damages sit on top of the actual loss, which is measured under the general damages provisions such as § 3333.
  • It does not treat the animal as a person. The section speaks of animals "being subjects of property", and does not create damages for the animal's own suffering as such.
  • It does not fix an amount. The section says exemplary damages may be given and leaves both the decision and the figure open.
  • It is not the criminal cruelty law. Prosecution for animal cruelty runs under the Penal Code and is a separate matter from this civil provision.

Worked examples

Invented situations, written to show how the wording bites. They are not real cases, not judgments and not precedent, and nothing here predicts what would happen in yours.

Illustrative example

A dog that has been getting into a neighbour's garden is deliberately struck with a spade and needs surgery. The owner is told a dog is worth what was paid for it.

How the wording applies

Section 3340 allows exemplary damages where the injury was committed willfully or by gross negligence, in disregard of humanity, over and above the actual loss measured under the general rules. The fact the outcome turns on is state of mind at the moment: driving a dog off a plot is a different thing from striking it once it has left, and the veterinary bill is the floor of the claim rather than its ceiling.

How the parties settled it

The neighbour pays the veterinary costs in full and a further agreed sum, and the two households agree in writing about fencing and about supervising the dog outside.

Illustrative example

A dog is left at a boarding kennel and comes back injured, having been housed with a much larger dog against the owner's written instruction.

How the wording applies

Gross negligence in disregard of humanity is the threshold, and the fact this hinges on is the instruction: housing a dog contrary to an express instruction about mixing is a different category from an accident during ordinary supervised play, which would get the owner the actual loss under section 3333 and no more.

How the parties settled it

The kennel waives its charges, pays the veterinary bill, and adopts a written policy on housing dogs separately where an owner has asked for it.

Related sections

CIV § 3333 Full Compensation for All Detriment Caused | CIV § 3333 CIV § 3342 Dog Owners Liable Regardless of Past Bites: CIV § 3342 CIV § 3341 Kill dog or animal attacking livestock: CIV § 3341

That's the law. Now let's settle your problem.

Say what is happening. A neutral mediator hears your side and the other party's, and walks you both to a written agreement. In the advanced settings you can ask for the decision to be reasoned on the California Codes.

This is with

Or open a session directly and invite the other party.

We copy this text from the official publisher and re-check it against that source on every page load, but we cannot guarantee it is complete, current or free of error, and we accept no liability for any reliance on it. An amendment can take effect before a consolidation catches up. The publisher's own copy is linked below; where the two differ, it is the official one that counts.

This page reproduces the text of CIV § 3340 in force at the date shown and explains it in general terms. It is not legal advice and takes no account of the circumstances of your case, which can change the answer completely. For a live dispute, for limitation periods, and before taking any step in court, consult a qualified lawyer in California.

← All California law pages