What factors play a significant role in such a settlement? The following article seeks to answer that specific question.

The defendant should feel motivated to settle.

The dog’s owner should appear liable. In other words, the owner should have no basis for a claim that the actions taken by the bitten victim had triggered an attack by the annoyed canine.

If the victim had been harmed to a great degree, then the canine’s owner should agree to settle, in order to avoid a potentially high court-ordered demand for payment of damages. Did any complications arise in the area where the dog’s teeth pierced the victim’s skin? That could give the plaintiff a reason for seeking a large compensation.

What had other plaintiffs received in terms of compensation, after a similar dog bite incident?

If the victim plans to file a lawsuit, where will that same lawsuit get filed?

Were there other reports of attacks by dogs in that particular region? What was the date for the most recent such attack?

If chances for a large award from a jury seem good, then the defendant is more likely to agree to a settlement. What is the record for the Injury Lawyer in Richmond Hill that has been retained by the victim? If that same attorney tends to avoid the need to take a case to trial, then the dog’s owner might hope to benefit from a low settlement offer.

What challenges might the victim of a dog bite face, while attempting to negotiate a settlement?

If the victim were self-employed, then the lawyer for the defendant might insist on more than one proof of the amount of money that that same entrepreneur has managed to take in during a single day. In other words, the plaintiff might need to produce both a tax statement and a copy of what could be found in the accountant’s books.

The nature of the victim’s response can affect the size of the victim’s compensation or award. One woman used pepper spray on a canine that tried to attack her. That action caused her to lose the money that she could have won in a personal injury lawsuit.

If the defendant sought to prove that the measures used to control the dog’s actions should have been effective, then that could make it harder for the plaintiff to win his or her case. If the pet that had attacked and bitten the victim/plaintiff had jumped over or dug under a fence or other barrier, then the defendant’s argument might hold some weight.

The plaintiff’s lawyer would need to learn more about the height and depth of such a barrier. In that way, it should prove easier to counter the defendant’s argument.

WE ARE OPEN FOR BUSINESS DURING COVID-19!
X