Settlement Obstacles in Dog Bite Cases

Animal attack settlement values are at an all-time high. The average dog bite settlement amount has increased 85 percent since 2015. However, insurance companies do not hand out settlement money like candy on Halloween. Their clever lawyers use legal loopholes, like the ones discussed below, to reduce or deny compensation to victims.

Because of the serious nature of dog bite injuries, victims need every dollar they can get to rebuild their shattered lives. A good Carlsbad personal injury lawyer does not give up until s/he obtains the most compensation possible under the circumstances. This compensation usually includes money for economic losses, such as medical bills, and noneconomic losses, such as pain and suffering.

Building a Claim

For starters, if a Carlsbad personal injury lawyer takes shortcuts during the case-building process, insurance company lawyers don’t need legal loopholes to reduce or deny compensation. The victim’s lawyer does their job for them.

A solid case is built on persuasive evidence, effective legal theories, and a sound approach to settlement negotiations.

The evidence in a dog bite or other personal injury matter usually includes the police accident report, medical bills, and witness statements. Many dog bite cases have evidence issues. Usually, an emergency responder didn’t file an official report and no one, other than the victim, witnessed the attack. So, a Carlsbad personal injury lawyer must maximize the medical bills, often by partnering with multiple independent physician witnesses.

Dog bite law is rather complex in California. Unless the legal theory matches the available evidence, a large settlement is unavailable. Possible legal theories include:

• Strict Liability: In some cases, animal owners are liable for dog bite damages as a matter of law, even if they didn’t know the animal was potentially vicious.
• Scienter (Knowledge): Evidence of knowledge includes aggressive barking, vicious snarling, and baring of teeth. Such pre-bite behavior triggers a heightened duty to control the animal.
• Negligence: This theory usually applies to non-owners. For example, schoolteachers are negligent if they allow children to play near strange dogs.

Most dog bite cases, and most other personal injury cases, settle out of court. During settlement negotiations, attorneys must know when to compromise and when to stand firm. Otherwise, settlement may be delayed or the victim must settle for less.

Comparative Fault

This legal doctrine may be the most common defense in dog bite cases. It usually appears in one of two forms: assumption of the risk or provocation.

The assumption of the risk defense may be available if the owner displayed a “Beware of Dog” or other sign.  To meet the elements of this defense (a voluntary assumption of a known risk), the insurance company must prove that the victim:

• Saw the sign,
• Could read the sign, and
• Understood the sign.

These points are often hard to prove if the victim was a young child or an LEP (limited English proficiency) individual.

Provocation is another form of comparative fault in a dog bite case. If the victim provoked the dog, the court could reduce or even eliminate compensation in the case.

However, legal provocation is different from everyday provocation. Victims cannot “accidentally” provoke dogs. Provocation is a deliberate act. Furthermore, provocation is an act. Mere aggressive teasing is not provocation. Instead, the victim must inflict so much physical pain on the animal that it was forced to react violently in self-defense.

Connect With a Thorough San Diego County Lawyer

Injury victims are entitled to substantial compensation. For a confidential consultation with an experienced personal injury lawyer in Carlsbad, contact the Pursley Law Firm. We routinely handle matters throughout the Golden State.

Source:

iii.org/article/spotlight-on-dog-bite-liability