Settling vs Going to Court for McKinney Dog Bite Claims

Dog bite victims could face pressure from the insurance company to settle the case outside of court. While this could be a good option, a victim should be aware that they are entitled to the right to a fair jury trial. They are entitled to have their day in court if the insurance company is not willing to compensate them fairly. If you were injured due to a dog attack, consult with an attorney who has experience handling dog bite cases. A dedicated dog bite lawyer could help you weigh the pros and cons of settling vs going to court for McKinney dog bite claims. If you need guidance in your dog bite case, reach out to a personal injury lawyer today.

First Steps After a Dog Bite Injury

Typically, before the claim is filed, the victim should get treatment for their injury. After the conclusion of their treatment, a lawyer will put a demand package together and send that over to the insurance company. After a person files a dog bite claim, insurance companies often want to do a recorded statement. However, a lawyer will advise against that. This is because there are just too many traps that an insurance company tries to set for injured parties, especially those that are unrepresented.

Factors Leading to a Lawsuit in McKinney

There are two factors determining whether or not the injured party will have to go to court. The first factor is if the insurance company decides to accept liability. If they do not accept liability, a person is left with little choice but to file a lawsuit. The second issue is the value for the injuries, both physical and emotional. If the insurance company is not choosing to acknowledge the full scope of the injuries, then the lawyer will sit down with the victim and weigh the pros and cons to determine if it makes sense to file a lawsuit. If they have a severe injury and the insurance company is not willing to compensate them fairly, then they going to court may be the best option.

Dog Bite Claims with Multiple Defendants

There may be as many as three defendants in a dog bite claim. A tenant, the landlord, and the owner of the home or apartment can all be potential defendants in the right circumstances. A seasoned lawyer could help make sure that all potential defendants are named. In Texas, the injured person or their lawyer has to establish that the landlord and the owner had actual knowledge of the dog and its dangerous propensities in a normal negligence case. With the dog owner, they can pursue a claim in strict liability and show that the dog has been previously violent. The owner or attorney does not necessarily have to prove actual knowledge of violent propensities in this circumstance but must show that the dog had previous violent propensities before the attack on the injured person.

Differences Between Trials and Settlements

A trial is different from a settlement in that if one goes to a jury trial, a jury is deciding what compensation the parties should receive and ultimately who is at fault. In a settlement, the parties are agreeing to resolve their differences without the need to go to court. People often mistakenly believe that the opponent will just settle the case because of a host of reasons that are not normally well thought out.

In reality, most settlements occur when the case is absolutely prepared for trial. If the weight of the evidence and the potential of a large judgment is overwhelming, the defendant has little choice but to settle. The better a case is prepared for trial, the more likely it is to settle and the less prepared a case is for trial, the more likely it is to actually go to trial. For more information about settling vs going to court for McKinney dog bite claims, contact a knowledgeable attorney.

Pros and Cons of Settling vs Going to Court

There are pros and cons to going to court and settling outside of court. For example, a person could potentially get a higher verdict from the jury trial in court. If someone is offering them a low amount, they could beat that offer in a jury trial. On the flip side, the positive aspect of settling is that it is a guaranteed amount of money. There is no risk of an appeal, and sometimes money now is better than money later. If they are not offering fair compensation, it may be a bad idea to settle. It is important to know that a jury is required to get the value that a person deserves.

Call a Lawyer to Learn About Settling Vs Going to Court for McKinney Dog Bite Claims

Settling vs going to court for McKinney dog bite claims can be a difficult decision for victims to make. Thankfully, an experienced dog bite attorney could help you decide which option is in your best interest. Regardless of whether you choose to settle or fight in court, a skilled personal injury lawyer could help. Get in touch with an attorney today to discuss your case.