DEMAND FOR SETTLEMENT - DOG BITE / ANIMAL ATTACK
STATE OF ILLINOIS
[FIRM NAME]
Attorneys at Law
[Street Address]
[City, Illinois ZIP]
Telephone: [Phone]
Facsimile: [Fax]
Email: [Email]
Licensed in the State of Illinois
DATE: [Date]
VIA CERTIFIED MAIL, RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED
AND FIRST-CLASS MAIL
[Adjuster Name / Dog Owner Name]
[Insurance Company Name / Address]
[Street Address]
[City, State ZIP]
RE: DOG BITE CLAIM - SETTLEMENT DEMAND
Our Client: [Client Full Name]
Date of Attack: [Date of Attack]
Location of Attack: [Address where attack occurred]
Dog Owner: [Dog Owner Name]
Dog Breed/Description: [Breed, Size, Color]
Claim Number: [If assigned]
Homeowner's Policy Number: [If known]
Dear [Recipient Name]:
This firm represents [Client Name] ("Claimant") for the serious and permanent injuries sustained as a result of a vicious dog attack that occurred on [Date of Attack] in [County] County, Illinois. The attack was perpetrated by a [Breed] dog owned by [Dog Owner Name]. This letter constitutes our formal demand for settlement under Illinois law.
I. ILLINOIS-SPECIFIC LEGAL FRAMEWORK
A. Statute of Limitations
Under 735 ILCS 5/13-202, the statute of limitations for personal injury claims in Illinois is two (2) years from the date of injury. This attack occurred on [Date], and therefore the limitations period expires on [Expiration Date].
B. Illinois Strict Liability - 510 ILCS 5/16 (Animal Control Act)
Illinois is a strict liability state for dog bites and attacks. Under Section 16 of the Illinois Animal Control Act (510 ILCS 5/16):
"If a dog or other animal, without provocation, attacks, attempts to attack, or injures any person who is peaceably conducting himself or herself in any place where he or she may lawfully be, the owner of such dog or other animal is liable in civil damages to such person for the full amount of the injury proximately caused thereby."
C. Key Elements Under Illinois Strict Liability
Under 510 ILCS 5/16, a plaintiff must prove:
- Injury caused by the dog (bite or other attack);
- Lack of provocation by the injured person;
- Peaceable conduct by the injured person; AND
- Lawful presence of the injured person at the location.
No proof of prior viciousness or owner knowledge is required. Illinois imposes true strict liability on dog owners.
D. Illinois Comparative Negligence
Illinois follows modified comparative negligence under 735 ILCS 5/2-1116. A plaintiff may recover damages only if their negligence does not exceed 50% of the total. If the plaintiff is more than 50% at fault, recovery is completely barred. Any recovery is reduced by the plaintiff's percentage of fault.
Our client bears absolutely no responsibility for this attack.
E. Relevant Illinois Case Law
- Robinson v. Brice, 2022 IL App (1st) 210549 - Modern application of 510 ILCS 5/16
- Steichman v. Hurst, 2015 IL App (1st) 142143 - Strict liability elements
- Docherty v. Sadler, 293 Ill. App. 3d 892 (1997) - Definition of provocation
- Nelson v. Lewis, 36 Ill. App. 3d 130 (1976) - Peaceable conduct requirement
- Forsyth v. Dugger, 169 Ill. App. 3d 362 (1988) - Landlord liability
II. PRESERVATION OF EVIDENCE NOTICE
YOU ARE HEREBY DIRECTED TO PRESERVE ALL EVIDENCE relating to this attack and the subject animal, including but not limited to:
- [ ] The animal itself (do not destroy, euthanize, or transfer without notice to our office)
- [ ] All veterinary records for the animal
- [ ] Vaccination records, including rabies vaccination
- [ ] Animal licensing and registration documents
- [ ] [County] County Animal Control records
- [ ] All photographs or videos of the animal
- [ ] Prior bite reports or complaints regarding this animal
- [ ] Prior aggressive incidents involving this animal
- [ ] Any "dangerous dog" or "vicious dog" designations
- [ ] Communications with animal control or authorities
- [ ] Homeowner's or renter's insurance policies
- [ ] Any liability exclusions or breed-specific riders
- [ ] Lease agreements (if renting) and any pet policies
- [ ] Training records for the animal
- [ ] Proof of confinement measures (fencing, leash, muzzle)
Illinois recognizes claims for spoliation of evidence. Destruction of any evidence, including euthanasia of the animal without proper notice and opportunity for examination, may result in adverse inferences, sanctions, and independent tort liability. See Boyd v. Travelers Ins. Co., 166 Ill. 2d 188 (1995).
III. STATEMENT OF FACTS
A. The Attack
On [Date of Attack], at approximately [Time], our client was [describe activity - e.g., "walking on the public sidewalk in front of [Address]," "visiting the dog owner's residence as an invited guest," "delivering mail as a United States Postal Service carrier," "in [his/her] own yard," etc.] in [City], [County] County, Illinois.
At that time, [Dog Owner Name]'s [Breed] dog [describe how attack occurred - e.g., "escaped from the owner's property through an unsecured gate," "was off-leash in violation of the [City/County] leash ordinance," "broke free from its leash when the owner lost control," "attacked without warning or provocation," etc.].
The dog attacked our client viciously and without provocation. [Describe the attack in detail]:
[Example: "The dog lunged at our client, knocked [him/her] to the ground, and bit [him/her] repeatedly on the [body parts affected]. Our client attempted to protect [himself/herself] but was unable to fend off the animal. The attack lasted approximately [duration] before [describe how attack ended]."]
B. Statutory Elements Under 510 ILCS 5/16
1. Injury by Dog: The dog owned by [Dog Owner Name] attacked and bit our client, causing the severe injuries documented herein.
2. No Provocation: Our client did absolutely nothing to provoke this attack. [He/She] did not tease, torment, abuse, or antagonize the dog in any way. Under Illinois law, provocation requires "an act or course of conduct that a reasonable person would anticipate would cause a dog to react." Docherty v. Sadler, 293 Ill. App. 3d 892 (1997). Our client engaged in no such conduct.
3. Peaceable Conduct: At the time of the attack, our client was peacefully [describe activity]. [He/She] was not engaged in any aggressive, threatening, or unlawful behavior.
4. Lawful Presence: Our client was lawfully present at the location. [He/She] was:
- [ ] On a public sidewalk/street
- [ ] An invited guest on the property
- [ ] Performing employment duties (mail carrier, delivery person, etc.)
- [ ] On [his/her] own property
- [ ] [Other lawful presence]
C. No Provocation Defense Available
Our client did absolutely nothing to provoke this attack. At the time of the incident, our client was:
- [ ] Peacefully and lawfully present at the location
- [ ] Not interacting with or approaching the dog
- [ ] Not engaging in any behavior that could be construed as threatening
- [ ] Not teasing, tormenting, or abusing the animal
- [ ] [Not on the dog owner's property / An invited guest on the property]
Illinois courts have held that provocation requires "more than mere conduct that foreseeably results in a dog bite." The victim's conduct must be such that "the injured person was doing some act, or performing some action which encouraged, incited, or aroused the dog to attack." Nelson v. Lewis, 36 Ill. App. 3d 130 (1976).
IV. LIABILITY ANALYSIS
A. Strict Liability Under 510 ILCS 5/16
Liability is established as a matter of law under Illinois' strict liability statute:
1. Injury by Dog: The dog owned by [Dog Owner Name] attacked and injured our client. Medical records document the injuries.
2. No Provocation: Our client did nothing to provoke the attack.
3. Peaceable Conduct: Our client was peacefully [walking/visiting/working/etc.] at the time.
4. Lawful Presence: Our client was lawfully present at [public sidewalk / private property as invitee / etc.].
Under 510 ILCS 5/16, these elements establish liability regardless of:
- Whether the dog had ever bitten anyone before
- Whether the owner knew of any dangerous propensities
- Whether the owner exercised reasonable care
B. Expanded Scope of Illinois Strict Liability
Illinois' Animal Control Act applies to any injury caused by a dog, not just bites. This includes:
- Knockdowns and resulting fall injuries
- Scratches and lacerations
- Injuries from fleeing from the dog
- Any other injury "proximately caused" by the dog
See Steichman v. Hurst, 2015 IL App (1st) 142143.
C. Alternative Negligence Theory
In addition to strict liability, the owner is liable under traditional negligence principles:
Duty: Dog owners owe a duty of reasonable care to prevent their animals from causing harm.
Breach: The owner breached this duty by:
- [ ] Violating the [City/County] leash law
- [ ] Failing to properly secure the animal
- [ ] Failing to maintain secure fencing
- [ ] Failing to adequately supervise the animal
- [ ] [Other breaches]
Causation: The breach directly caused our client's injuries.
Damages: Our client suffered substantial damages as detailed below.
D. Negligence Per Se
The dog owner's violation of [Municipal Code Section] (leash law) constitutes negligence per se under Illinois law.
E. Landlord Liability (If Applicable)
[If attack occurred on rental property:]
Under Illinois law, a landlord may be held liable for injuries caused by a tenant's dog. In Forsyth v. Dugger, 169 Ill. App. 3d 362 (1988), the court recognized landlord liability when:
- [ ] The landlord harbored or kept the dog
- [ ] The landlord knew of the dog's presence and dangerous propensities
- [ ] The landlord had the ability to control the premises
[Landlord Name], as owner of the premises at [Address], is also liable because [describe basis for landlord liability].
V. INJURIES AND MEDICAL TREATMENT
A. Description of Injuries
The attack caused severe injuries to our client, including:
Bite Wounds:
- [ ] [Location] - [Description: puncture wound, laceration, avulsion, etc.]
- [ ] [Location] - [Description]
- [ ] [Location] - [Description]
Secondary Injuries:
- [ ] Soft tissue damage
- [ ] Nerve damage
- [ ] Tendon/ligament damage
- [ ] Bone fractures
- [ ] Crush injuries
- [ ] Infection risk (including rabies exposure)
Scarring and Disfigurement:
- [ ] Permanent scarring to [body parts]
- [ ] Disfigurement requiring plastic surgery
- [ ] Keloid formation
Psychological Injuries:
- [ ] Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD)
- [ ] Cynophobia (fear of dogs)
- [ ] Anxiety and panic attacks
- [ ] Depression
- [ ] Sleep disturbances / nightmares
B. Emergency Treatment
Immediately following the attack, our client was transported to [Hospital Name - e.g., Northwestern Memorial, Rush, Loyola, etc.] Emergency Department, where [he/she] received:
- [ ] Wound irrigation and debridement
- [ ] Suturing / wound closure ([number] sutures)
- [ ] Tetanus prophylaxis
- [ ] Rabies post-exposure prophylaxis (PEP) series
- [ ] Antibiotic therapy
- [ ] Pain management
- [ ] Diagnostic imaging
C. Follow-Up Treatment
[Detail all follow-up medical treatment, specialists, surgeries, physical therapy, mental health treatment, etc.]
D. Prognosis
[Describe current status, permanent conditions, future treatment needs]
VI. DAMAGES
A. Medical Expenses
| Provider | Service | Amount Billed |
|---|---|---|
| [Ambulance Service] | Emergency Transport | $[Amount] |
| [Hospital] | Emergency Department | $[Amount] |
| [Hospital] | Rabies PEP Series | $[Amount] |
| [Follow-up providers] | [Services] | $[Amount] |
| [Plastic Surgeon] | [Services] | $[Amount] |
| [Mental Health] | Therapy | $[Amount] |
| TOTAL PAST MEDICAL | $[Total] |
B. Future Medical Expenses
| Treatment | Estimated Cost |
|---|---|
| Future Scar Revision Surgery | $[Amount] |
| Continued Mental Health Treatment | $[Amount] |
| Future Medications | $[Amount] |
| TOTAL FUTURE MEDICAL | $[Total] |
C. Lost Wages
| Category | Amount |
|---|---|
| Lost Wages ([dates]) | $[Amount] |
| Lost PTO/Sick Time | $[Amount] |
| TOTAL LOST WAGES | $[Total] |
D. Pain and Suffering
Physical Pain:
Our client has endured excruciating pain from the initial attack, wound treatment, rabies vaccinations, surgical procedures, and ongoing recovery.
Emotional Distress:
Our client suffers from PTSD, fear of dogs, anxiety, and ongoing psychological trauma requiring professional treatment.
Permanent Disfigurement:
Our client has permanent, visible scarring on [body parts] that causes ongoing embarrassment and self-consciousness.
Loss of Enjoyment of Life:
Our client can no longer [describe activities affected by fear of dogs, physical limitations, etc.].
E. Summary of Damages
| Category | Amount |
|---|---|
| Past Medical Expenses | $[Amount] |
| Future Medical Expenses | $[Amount] |
| Past Lost Wages | $[Amount] |
| TOTAL ECONOMIC DAMAGES | $[Subtotal] |
| Pain and Suffering | $[Amount] |
| Permanent Disfigurement | $[Amount] |
| Emotional Distress / PTSD | $[Amount] |
| Loss of Enjoyment of Life | $[Amount] |
| TOTAL NON-ECONOMIC DAMAGES | $[Subtotal] |
| TOTAL DAMAGES | $[Grand Total] |
VII. SETTLEMENT DEMAND
A. Demand Amount
Based upon the strict liability imposed by 510 ILCS 5/16, the severity of our client's injuries, and the substantial damages incurred, we hereby demand:
$[DEMAND AMOUNT]
[OR - Policy Limits Demand:]
TENDER OF FULL POLICY LIMITS OF $[AMOUNT]
B. Time for Response
This demand will remain open for thirty (30) days from the date of this letter, through and including [Expiration Date].
C. Basis for Demand
This demand reflects:
- Medical expenses of $[Amount]
- Lost wages of $[Amount]
- The permanent nature of the scarring and psychological trauma
- Comparable verdicts and settlements in Illinois for similar attacks
- The strength of strict liability under 510 ILCS 5/16
VIII. INSURANCE COVERAGE
We demand disclosure of all applicable insurance coverage, including:
- [ ] Homeowner's insurance policy declarations page
- [ ] Renter's insurance policy (if applicable)
- [ ] Umbrella/excess liability policy
- [ ] Any exclusions or limitations for animal-related claims
- [ ] All policy limits applicable to this claim
IX. DOCUMENTATION ENCLOSED
- [ ] Medical records and bills from all providers
- [ ] Photographs of injuries
- [ ] Police/Animal Control incident report
- [ ] [County] County Animal Control records
- [ ] Witness statements
- [ ] Employment records and wage verification
X. CONCLUSION
Under Illinois' strict liability statute, 510 ILCS 5/16, the dog owner is liable for our client's injuries as a matter of law. Our client was peacefully and lawfully present when the owner's dog viciously attacked [him/her] without provocation, causing permanent physical and psychological injuries.
We are prepared to file suit in the Circuit Court of [County] County, Illinois, if this matter cannot be resolved promptly and fairly.
Please contact me at your earliest convenience to discuss settlement.
Respectfully submitted,
[FIRM NAME]
By: _________________________________
[Attorney Name]
ARDC No. [Number]
Attorney for [Client Name]
ENCLOSURES: [List]
cc: [Client Name]
File
ILLINOIS-SPECIFIC PRACTICE NOTES
-
[ ] Strict Liability State: Illinois imposes strict liability under 510 ILCS 5/16. No need to prove prior viciousness or owner knowledge.
-
[ ] Broad Scope: The statute covers "attacks, attempts to attack, or injures" - not limited to bites.
-
[ ] Provocation Defense: The only real defense is provocation. Document that client did nothing to provoke.
-
[ ] Comparative Negligence: Illinois follows the 51% bar rule. Provocation arguments may reduce recovery.
-
[ ] Landlord Liability: Illinois recognizes landlord liability in appropriate circumstances. See Forsyth v. Dugger.
-
[ ] Venue: Circuit Court of the county where the attack occurred or where defendant resides.
-
[ ] Cook County: If in Cook County, be aware of specific local rules and potential assignment to a particular division.
-
[ ] Mandatory Arbitration: Some Illinois counties have mandatory arbitration for claims under certain amounts.