Problem: At common law, the owner of a dog was liable to someone whom the dog had bitten only if the owner was on notice that the dog had a propensity to bite. The requisite propensity could be shown by either a prior bite (hence, the colloquialism every dog gets one bite) or where the dog was of a vicious breed. Does that rule make policy sense, especially compared to the modern trend of holding dog owners strictly liable even for first bites? If so, is that policy appropriate for modern corporate governance?