Kids and adults are attacked by dogs more often than most people are willing to believe. The consequences of those attacks are immediate and can be severe and even lead to death. Statistics from the Center for Disease Control suggest over 4 million people are attacked by dogs each year.
Owners have an obligation to prevent their dogs from biting others, whether it's at the neighborhood dog park, on a walk, or even on their own property - when the mailman stops by to drop off a package, for example. Children are especially at risk since they may not be able to understand the situation or fend off an aggressive dog. To better understand this obligation and what owners need to do, let's take a quick look at why dogs bite.
The Sacramento Bee recently reported serious dog bites have risen 44% state wide and the Sacramento Valley has seen a rise of over 50% since 2006. The raw numbers are even more telling and reflect the consequence to the average California resident.
Dog bites that result in injury can be incredibly traumatic for the individual attacked. Whether the victim was an adult or a child, the memory and physical scars of a dog bite attack can present ongoing issues for many years to come. From the development of cynophobia (the pathological fear of dogs) to generalized anxiety and post traumatic stress disorder, those who survive this kind of traumatic attack may need many months or years of professional assistance to overcome the effects of a dog bite attack. Sadly, dog bites are very common in California.
Many personal injury situations are pretty clear with a clear idea of the responsible party. What happens when liability is in dispute or when the situation arises that there is what's called "comparative negligence." This most often happens when the defendant claims you were at least partially to blame for the crash. This can affect the total amount of your claim. The law Office of Guenard & Bozarth will work diligently to eliminate this possibility. What happens when the facts support shared liability?
Imagine you're in a traffic crash where the other driver negligently ran a stop sign and you just happened to be driving at a speed above the posted limit at the time of the crash. The reality is you might share 10 percent of the blame for the accident while the other driver accepts 90 percent of the actual fault. Now imagine your damages add up to $15,000. Understanding this how would a shared fault situation impact your potential compensation? Under California's pure comparative negligence rule, your compensation will be reduced to $13,500 (or the $15,000 total minus the $1,500 that represents your share of fault for the accident.)
What's interesting is while the court system is obligated to follow this rule individual adjustors aren't bound by the same rules outside of the actual court. Adjustors will often assume a combative and unreasonable point of view and offer only a very small token settlement to limit their exposure and your eventual recovery. In fact, an adjustor will often raise the issue of California's comparative negligence rule during settlement talks when they have no basis in the negotiation. Outside of court we are free to negotiate what the impact of the rule should be on your claim. Often times we are able to bypass any comparative negligence claims and that allows our office to enhance your settlement.
We help with serious issues that require serious representation. We are the Law Offices of Guenard & Bozarth. We have over 80 years of experience practicing law on our legal team. Call GB Legal 24/7/365 at 888-809-1075 or visit www.gblegal.com We Can Help!
Anyone familiar with our Law Office knows we handle Personal Injury Litigation exclusively. We work with injured people from injury to settlement and that can mean all the way to trial. We take exceptional care of our clients and as a result they often ask us to handle everything from Estate Planning to Family Law and child custody.
We see more and more evidence that features designed to protect us are actually doing the opposite. Let's take a minute and review some of the more obvious and egregious examples;
The cost of dog bite litigation is climbing in California and larger settlements are being awarded to resolve these claims. State Farm reports that more than one third of their homeowner claims are as a result of costs resulting from dog bites. It was also reported that much of the settlement increase comes as a result of more severe injuries and better reporting. It was also reported that Sacramento ranks #16 nationally in postal carriers being bitten by aggressive dogs and these facts only tell a portion of the story.
A recent state audit provides evidence that California's oversight of limousines, shuttles, charter busses and other passenger carriers is "insufficient to ensure consumer safety" in the aftermath of a deadly limo fire on the San Mateo Bridge. We have written about this fire on several occasions. The general public has been led to believe that the State Agency paid to oversee these conveyances is doing a good job and we don't agree. When 5 people die in a limo fire that was preventable it becomes clear they are not doing an even acceptable job.
When we lose a loved one it's always sad. It makes it worse when the death arose due to irresponsibility. If you believe that the death of a loved one was due to unlawful or negligent behavior, you should consider seeking the advice of an experienced Personal Injury Attorney.