DEMAND FOR SETTLEMENT - DOG BITE / ANIMAL ATTACK
STATE OF INDIANA
[FIRM NAME]
Attorneys at Law
[Street Address]
[City, Indiana ZIP]
Telephone: [Phone]
Facsimile: [Fax]
Email: [Email]
Licensed in the State of Indiana
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, Indiana. The attack was perpetrated by a [Breed] dog owned by [Dog Owner Name]. This letter constitutes our formal demand for settlement under Indiana law.
I. INDIANA-SPECIFIC LEGAL FRAMEWORK
A. Statute of Limitations
Under Indiana Code Section 34-11-2-4, the statute of limitations for personal injury claims in Indiana is two (2) years from the date of injury. This attack occurred on [Date], and therefore the limitations period expires on [Expiration Date].
B. Indiana Strict Liability - Ind. Code Section 15-20-1-3
Indiana is a strict liability state for dog bites. Under Indiana Code Section 15-20-1-3:
"If a dog, without provocation, bites a person:
(1) who is acting peaceably; and
(2) who is in a location where the person may be required to be in order to discharge a duty imposed upon the person by the laws of Indiana or the United States or by the laws or postal regulations of the United States;
the owner of the dog is liable for all damages suffered by the person bitten."
C. Expanded Strict Liability Under Indiana Case Law
While the statute specifically applies to persons discharging official duties, Indiana courts have recognized broader strict liability principles. In Poznanski v. Horvath, 788 N.E.2d 1255 (Ind. 2003), the Indiana Supreme Court held that dog owners can be held strictly liable when they have actual knowledge of the dog's dangerous propensities.
D. Key Elements Under Indiana Law
For Statutory Strict Liability (Ind. Code Section 15-20-1-3):
1. The dog bit the person;
2. Without provocation;
3. The person was acting peaceably; AND
4. The person was in a location required by duty (postal workers, utility workers, etc.).
For Common Law Strict Liability (Poznanski):
1. The dog caused injury;
2. The dog had dangerous propensities; AND
3. The owner had actual knowledge of those propensities.
For Negligence:
1. Duty of care;
2. Breach of duty;
3. Causation; AND
4. Damages.
E. Indiana Comparative Fault
Indiana follows modified comparative fault under Indiana Code Section 34-51-2-6. A plaintiff may recover damages only if their fault is not greater than 50% of the total fault. 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.
F. Relevant Indiana Case Law
- Poznanski v. Horvath, 788 N.E.2d 1255 (Ind. 2003) - Strict liability with knowledge of dangerous propensities
- Hardsaw v. Courtney, 665 N.E.2d 603 (Ind. Ct. App. 1996) - Landlord liability for tenant's dog
- Alfano v. Stutsman, 471 N.E.2d 1143 (Ind. Ct. App. 1984) - Scienter requirement
- Ross v. Lowe, 619 N.E.2d 911 (Ind. 1993) - Premises liability principles
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 animal" 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)
Destruction of any evidence, including euthanasia of the animal without proper notice and opportunity for examination, may result in adverse inferences and sanctions under Indiana law.
III. STATEMENT OF FACTS
A. The Attack
On [Date of Attack], at approximately [Time], our client was [describe activity - e.g., "delivering mail as a United States Postal Service carrier," "reading a utility meter," "walking on the public sidewalk in front of [Address]," "visiting the dog owner's residence as an invited guest," etc.] in [City], [County] County, Indiana.
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. Basis for Strict Liability
[SELECT THE APPLICABLE BASIS:]
Option A - Statutory Strict Liability (If victim was performing official duties):
Our client was [a mail carrier / utility worker / other official capacity] performing duties required by law at the time of the attack. Under Indiana Code Section 15-20-1-3, the dog owner is strictly liable for all damages.
Option B - Common Law Strict Liability (If owner had knowledge):
The dog owner had actual knowledge of this dog's dangerous propensities prior to the attack, as evidenced by:
- [Prior bite incidents]
- [Prior aggressive behavior]
- [Complaints to owner or animal control]
- [Warning signs posted]
- [Owner statements acknowledging danger]
Under Poznanski v. Horvath, 788 N.E.2d 1255 (Ind. 2003), the owner is strictly liable when they have actual knowledge of dangerous propensities.
C. Evidence of Scienter (Prior Knowledge of Dangerous Propensities)
The dog owner knew or should have known of the animal's dangerous propensities. Evidence of such knowledge includes:
- [ ] Prior Bite Incidents: This dog has bitten [number] other people on [prior dates]. [Provide details.]
- [ ] Prior Aggressive Behavior: This dog has displayed aggressive behavior including [describe: lunging, growling, snapping, chasing, attacking other animals, etc.].
- [ ] Complaints to Animal Control: [Number] complaints have been filed with [City/County] Animal Control regarding this dog.
- [ ] Warning Signs: The owner posted "Beware of Dog" signs on the property.
- [ ] Owner Admissions: The owner has admitted [describe admissions].
- [ ] Witness Statements: Neighbors and others can attest to prior incidents.
D. No Provocation
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
- [ ] [Performing required duties / An invited guest / On public property]
IV. LIABILITY ANALYSIS
A. Statutory Strict Liability Under Ind. Code Section 15-20-1-3
[If applicable - victim was performing official duties:]
All elements required for statutory strict liability are satisfied:
- Dog Bite: The dog owned by [Dog Owner Name] bit our client.
- No Provocation: Our client did nothing to provoke the attack.
- Peaceable Conduct: Our client was acting peaceably while [performing duties].
- Required Presence: Our client was required to be at the location to [deliver mail / read meter / perform inspection / etc.].
B. Common Law Strict Liability Under Poznanski
[If applicable - owner had knowledge of dangerous propensities:]
Under Poznanski v. Horvath, 788 N.E.2d 1255 (Ind. 2003), the Indiana Supreme Court recognized that dog owners can be held strictly liable when they have actual knowledge of their dog's dangerous propensities.
Here, [Dog Owner Name] had actual knowledge that this dog was dangerous because:
- [List specific evidence of knowledge]
C. Negligence Theory
The owner is also liable under traditional negligence principles:
Duty: Dog owners in Indiana owe a duty of reasonable care to prevent their animals from causing harm.
Breach: The owner breached this duty by:
- [ ] Failing to properly restrain the dog
- [ ] Failing to properly confine the dog to the property
- [ ] Failing to maintain secure fencing
- [ ] Failing to warn of the dog's dangerous propensities
- [ ] Violating the [City/County] leash ordinance
- [ ] [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 [City/County Municipal Code Section] (leash law) constitutes negligence per se under Indiana law.
E. Landlord Liability (If Applicable)
[If attack occurred on rental property:]
Under Indiana law, a landlord may be held liable for injuries caused by a tenant's dog. In Hardsaw v. Courtney, 665 N.E.2d 603 (Ind. Ct. App. 1996), the court recognized landlord liability when:
- [ ] The landlord retained control over the premises
- [ ] The landlord knew of the dog's dangerous propensities
- [ ] The landlord failed to take reasonable steps to protect invitees
[Landlord Name] 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., IU Health, St. Vincent, Community Health, 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 liability established under Indiana law, 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 Indiana for similar attacks
- The strength of liability under Indiana law
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
- [ ] Evidence of prior incidents
- [ ] Witness statements
- [ ] Employment records and wage verification
X. CONCLUSION
Under Indiana law, the dog owner is liable for our client's injuries. [Our client was performing official duties and is protected by Ind. Code Section 15-20-1-3 / The owner had actual knowledge of dangerous propensities triggering strict liability under Poznanski / The owner was negligent in controlling the animal.] Our client was an innocent victim who has suffered permanent physical and psychological injuries.
We are prepared to file suit in the [County] Circuit/Superior Court, Indiana, 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]
Indiana Attorney No. [Number]
Attorney for [Client Name]
ENCLOSURES: [List]
cc: [Client Name]
File
INDIANA-SPECIFIC PRACTICE NOTES
-
[ ] Statutory Strict Liability Limited: Ind. Code Section 15-20-1-3 applies specifically to persons performing official duties (mail carriers, utility workers, etc.).
-
[ ] Common Law Strict Liability: Under Poznanski, strict liability applies when owner has actual knowledge of dangerous propensities.
-
[ ] One-Bite Rule Still Applies: For victims not performing official duties and where owner lacks knowledge, traditional negligence must be proven.
-
[ ] Comparative Fault: Indiana follows the 51% bar rule. Provocation may reduce or bar recovery.
-
[ ] Landlord Liability: Indiana recognizes landlord liability under Hardsaw v. Courtney when landlord has knowledge and control.
-
[ ] Venue: Circuit or Superior Court of the county where the attack occurred or where defendant resides.
-
[ ] Marion County: Marion County has specific small claims and township court rules.