FREE CASE CONSULTATION
312-622-2900
Facebook-f Linkedin Google Instagram

Dog Bite Injuries Attorney in Stanford

Let Carlson Bier Fight For You

Over $50 Million in Recoveries

5-Star Advanced Local Service Ads For Carlson Bier
Find Out if You Have a Case in 10 Seconds
Jeff Bier – Personal Injury Lawyer At Carlson Bier Associates
Personal Injury Lawyer Orland Park Illinois | Carlson Bier Associates

About Carlson Bier Associates

Suffering from a dog bite injury can be traumatic, leaving you burdened with pain and hefty expenses. With the nuanced laws surrounding such incidents in Stanford, your road to rightful compensation deserves professional legal guidance. At Carlson Bier, we have a dedicated team of seasoned Dog Bite Injury lawyers who understand these complexities thoroughly. We leverage our vast experience and deep-rooted expertise in negotiations and litigation processes to fight for justice on behalf of our clients. Being well-versed with Stanford’s legal landscape allows us to navigate efficiently through local courts while keeping you informed every step of the way. Whether it’s dealing with insurance agencies or going after negligent owners directly, Carlson Bier strives tirelessly to secure comprehensive recovery for damages incurred by our clients due to reckless canine ownership. Trust your case only in reliable hands; trust Carlson Bier – an acclaimed law firm renowned for their knack in utilizing robust strategies tailored explicitly towards achieving optimal results in dog bite injury cases.

Meet Our Attorneys
About Carlson Bier

Dog Bite Injuries Lawyers in Stanford Illinois

At Carlson Bier, we understand the emotional and physical toll a dog bite injury can inflict. As personal injury attorneys with vast experience in Illinois state laws, we’re here to uphold your rights and ensure you attain fair compensation for damages incurred as a result of such distressing incidents.

Dog bites often lead to severe injuries including lacerations, infections, fractures, emotional trauma, or even fatalities in extreme cases. It is crucial therefore to understand that under Illinois law, the dog owner is liable for any harm their pet might cause – yet many Illinois residents are not aware of this. These legal provisions mandate that injured parties receive adequate recovery funds to cover medical bills and other associated costs.

Some additional key factors include:

• Dog owners cannot defend themselves by claiming they were unaware of their pet’s aggressive tendencies.

• Even if the attack happens on private property but without provocation – liability still holds.

• The severity level of an injury does not influence owners’ responsibility; no matter how minor or severe.

Time constraints add another layer of complexity to these lawsuits; litigation must be initiated within two years from the date of the accident according to Illinois statute limitations. Missing out on this deadline could potentially eliminate your chances for seeking justice completely. This underscores the importance of swift legal intervention following an incident.

Emotional Harm: In addition to physical injuries, victims may also suffer psychological effects such as anxiety and fear. A comprehensive claim should account for all aspects of anguish suffered due to a dog bite incident.

For children who constitute half the victims in US dog bite incidents annually – trauma effects are particularly pronounced since they have less understanding and capacity to handle such distressing events compared with adults. Hence it’s vitally important parents enlist experienced attorneys like those at Carlson Bier who know how best to represent minors during these trials.

Expenses resulting directly from injuries include immediate medical attention, potential need for cosmetic surgery due to scarring or disfigurement caused by the bite, ongoing counseling for psychological trauma among numerous other costs. Irrefutable evidence of these expenses forms a significant part of building a solid case in court.

There are an estimated 77.5 million owned dogs in America representing one dog for every four people approximately and the state of Illinois is no exception to this wide prevalence implying that many residents stand at risk of suffering a dog bite. Thus, it’s crucial to understand inherent risks interacting with dogs and necessary precautions like asking owner’s permission before petting their pets or avoiding sudden movements around dogs unfamiliar to you which startle them.

Indeed, navigating complexities surrounding personal injury law after suffering the shock and pain from a traumatic event such as a dog bite can be overwhelming. At Carlson Bier, we strive to unburden our clients from these intricacies and focus solely on their full recovery while we handle intricate legal maneuvers leading up to rightful compensation.

Our decades-spanning experience within the Illinois legal landscape provides invaluable edge when constructing rigorous defense strategies in favor of victims – allowing us best represent your interests during trial or outside court settlements successfully.

However, each case has unique circumstances that determine its outcome; hence it would serve your interest best if we could discuss specifics directly. We invite you therefore to click on the button below – giving us chance evaluate how much your case could potentially be worth based on experienced preemptive analysis. Trust in our devotion towards serving justice – make that call today not only for yourself but also generations ahead who deserve safer neighborhood environments thanks ultimately to responsible pet ownership.

Find Out How Much Your Case is Worth
Testimonials from Clients

Your Success Is Our Success

Notable Illinois Appellate Wins

Moruzzi v. CCC Servs., Inc., 2020 IL App (2d) 190411, 171 N.E.3d 61
Background: Insured motorist filed action against insurer for declaratory judgment seeking construction of automobile insurance policy issued to insured and that was in effect when insured was injured by an underinsured driver. The Circuit Court, DuPage County, Bonnie M. Wheaton, J., granted the insurer's motions for summary judgment. Insured appealed.Holdings: The Appellate Court, Zenoff, J., held that:1 medical payments reduction clause in automobile insurance policy conflicted with underinsured motorist provisions so as to render reduction clause ambiguous, and thus medical payment benefits were deductible from insured's damages;2 law firm representing insured did not create common fund or common funds when it reached settlement with underinsured motorist, and thus law firm was not entitled to recover fees under common-fund doctrine; and3 collateral estoppel did not bar automobile insurers from litigating whether common-fund doctrine applied in insured motorist's declaratory judgment action.Affirmed in part and reversed in part.
Maier v. CC Servs., Inc., 2019 IL App (3d) 170640, 132 N.E.3d 795
Background: After insured, who was injured in automobile collision with another driver, recovered full liability limits of driver's policy, she filed amended complaint for declaratory judgment against her own automobile insurer, alleging that insurer breached contractual duty to pay for insured's damages in accordance with uninsured/underinsured motorist (UIM) coverage in insured's policy and that insurer acted in bad faith in denying insured such coverage. The Circuit Court, La Salle County, Troy D. Holland, J., granted the insurer's motion to dismiss claims as time-barred. Insured appealed.The Appellate Court ruled that neither the insurer nor the insured could add amended policy provisions to the court record. It was decided that the policy's requirement for a written arbitration demand applied to both uninsured and underinsured motorist claims. The court found that a letter from the insured's attorney to the insurer wasn't a valid arbitration demand nor a proof of loss to toll the statute of limitations. Finally, the insurer was permitted to use the defense based on the two-year statute of limitations period. The court's decision was affirmed.
Econ. Premier Assurance Co. v. Country Mut. Ins. Co., 2021 IL App (1st) 192364-U
Holding: The circuit court's order that granted defendant's motion for summary judgment and denied plaintiff's motion for partial summary judgment was proper where defendant had no duty to indemnify its insured with respect to the underlying complaint and therefore plaintiff was not entitled to recover against defendant on its subrogation or unjust enrichment claims; affirmed.
Country Preferred Ins. Co. v. Westerheide, 2023 IL App (5th) 220343-U
Holding: The court affirmed judgment of the circuit court granting summary judgment in favor of the plaintiff where the defendant failed to make a written demand for arbitration within two years from the date of the accident as required by the underinsured provisions of the defendant's automotive insurance policy.
Country Mut. Ins. Co. v. Olsak, 2022 IL App (1st) 200695, 216 N.E.3d 291
In a complex legal case, an insurer sought to avoid defending or indemnifying a hockey player under a policy issued to the player's stepfather after the player was sued for assaulting his coach. The initial Circuit Court ruling favored the insurer, but the Appellate Court reversed this decision, leading to a protracted legal battle. Ultimately, the Appellate Court determined the insurer was liable only up to the $3 million policy limit and found the insurer's four-year delay in seeking a declaratory judgment to be reasonable. This case highlights important aspects of insurance litigation and policy limit liabilities.
Country Mut. Ins. Co. v. Durkin Elec. Co., Inc., 2022 IL App (1st) 210293-U, appeal denied, 199 N.E.3d 1187 (Ill. 2022)
Holding: The circuit court's order that denied plaintiff's motion for partial summary judgment and found that defendant was an additional insured under the policy was proper. The circuit court's order that denied defendant's motion for summary judgment and found that plaintiff did not have a duty to defend or indemnify defendant under the policy was proper; affirmed.
Country Preferred Ins. Co. v. Groen, 2017 IL App (4th) 160028, 69 N.E.3d 911
Background: Uninsured motorist (UM) carrier brought action against insured for declaratory judgment that it owed no benefits since workers' compensation received by insured exceeded policy limits. The Circuit Court, Sangamon County, Chris Perrin, J., entered summary judgment in favor of the carrier. Insured appealed.Holdings: The Appellate Court, Harris, J., held that:1 employer's medical payments entitled carrier to setoff, and2 setoff clauses were enforceable.Affirmed.
Country Mut. Ins. Co. v. Frobish, 2021 IL App (3d) 190473-U
Holding: Allegations in the underlying complaint that a township employee caused property damage by excavating and digging out a ditch failed to impose a duty to defend under township employee's individual farm insurance policy.
Country Mut. Ins. Co. v. Jones, 2018 IL App (1st) 173154-U
Holding: The judgment of the circuit court of Cook County is affirmed; plaintiff is entitled to summary judgment on its claim for a declaratory judgment that it has no duty to defend or indemnify its insured against the underlying complaint because the loss claimed in the underlying complaint is subject to an exclusion. The court held that it would also enter judgment for plaintiff because the underlying complaint does not allege an “occurrence” causing bodily injury within the meaning of the policy.
Country Mut. Ins. Co. v. Schmitt, 2021 IL App (5th) 190173-U
Holding: The appellate court reversed and remanded the judgment of the circuit court where plaintiff had no duty to defend its insured and thus was not stopped from raising policy defenses to coverage for the underlying tort action contained in the amended declaratory action.
Country Mut. Ins. Co. v. Livorsi Marine, Inc., 222 Ill. 2d 303, 856 N.E.2d 338 (2006) (the late Keith Carlson)
Liability insurer brought action against insureds for a declaratory judgment based on failure to provide timely notice of lawsuits against them. The Circuit Court, Cook County, Stephen A. Schiller, J., entered judgment for the insurer. Insureds appealed. The Appellate Court, Wolfson, J., 358 Ill.App.3d 880, 295 Ill.Dec. 665, 833 N.E.2d 871, affirmed. Leave to appeal was granted.Holdings: The Supreme Court, Garman, J., held that:1 if the insurer did not receive reasonable notice of an occurrence or a lawsuit, the policyholder may not recover under the policy, regardless of whether the lack of reasonable notice prejudiced the insurer, overruling Rice v. AAA Aerostar, Inc., 294 Ill.App.3d 801, 229 Ill.Dec. 20, 690 N.E.2d 1067, and Cincinnati Insurance Co. v. Baur's Opera House, Inc., 296 Ill.App.3d 1011, 230 Ill.Dec. 624, 694 N.E.2d 593, and2 insured did not need to prove that it was prejudiced by delayed notice of lawsuits.Affirmed.
Education & Information

Resources For Stanford Residents

Links

Legal Associations and Lawyer Services

Online Legal Resources and Directories

Specialized Services and Educational Resources

Legal Blogs
SEE MORE

Frequently Asked Questions

Dog Bite Injuries FAQ​

The most common causes of dog bite injuries in Chicago include:

  • Unprovoked attacks: These attacks occur when a dog bites someone with no warning or provocation.
  • Provoked attacks: These attacks occur when someone does something to provoke the dog, such as teasing it or trying to take its food away.
  • Territory guarding: These attacks occur when a dog bites someone who is entering its territory.
  • Motherhood protection: These attacks occur when a mother dog bites someone who is approaching her puppies.

If you are bitten by a dog in Chicago, you should:

  • Clean the wound immediately with soap and water.
  • Apply a bandage to the wound.
  • Seek medical attention immediately. Even if you don’t think your injuries are serious, it’s important to get checked out by a doctor.
  • Report the dog bite to the local animal control agency.

Dog bite injuries can have a number of long-term effects, both physical and emotional. Some people may experience chronic pain, scarring, or nerve damage. Others may develop a fear of dogs or other animals.

Illinois is a strict liability state when it comes to dog bites. This means that the owner of a dog is liable for any injuries caused by the dog, regardless of whether the owner knew the dog was capable of such behavior.

There are a few exceptions to this rule, such as if the person who was bitten was trespassing on private property or if the person provoked the dog.

Yes, you are entitled to compensation if you are bitten by a dog and have suffered injuries. You can file a lawsuit against the dog owner to recover your damages, such as medical expenses, lost wages, and pain and suffering.

All Attorney Services in Stanford

Areas of Practice in Stanford

Cycling Mishaps

Expert in legal advocacy for people injured in bicycle accidents due to other parties' indifference or perilous conditions.

Flame Injuries

Giving expert legal help for victims of severe burn injuries caused by incidents or misconduct.

Hospital Malpractice

Ensuring specialist legal advice for patients affected by clinical malpractice, including wrong treatment.

Products Obligation

Addressing cases involving dangerous products, extending expert legal assistance to clients affected by product malfunctions.

Nursing Home Misconduct

Supporting the rights of elders who have been subjected to abuse in aged care environments, ensuring compensation.

Tumble and Tumble Mishaps

Expert in addressing tumble accident cases, providing legal representation to clients seeking restitution for their injuries.

Newborn Damages

Extending legal guidance for kin affected by medical malpractice resulting in birth injuries.

Vehicle Accidents

Accidents: Focused on helping victims of car accidents secure fair payout for hurts and impairment.

Scooter Collisions

Dedicated to providing representation for motorcyclists involved in scooter accidents, ensuring rightful claims for traumas.

Trucking Collision

Delivering specialist legal representation for drivers involved in big rig accidents, focusing on securing fair recompense for injuries.

Construction Site Incidents

Engaged in advocating for workers or bystanders injured in construction site accidents due to recklessness or irresponsibility.

Brain Harms

Committed to extending compassionate legal representation for clients suffering from cognitive injuries due to misconduct.

K9 Assault Traumas

Adept at addressing cases for victims who have suffered injuries from K9 assaults or beast attacks.

Pedestrian Incidents

Dedicated to legal assistance for foot-travelers involved in accidents, providing professional services for recovering claims.

Undeserved Passing

Fighting for grieving parties affected by a wrongful death, offering understanding and professional legal guidance to ensure redress.

Backbone Damage

Dedicated to representing patients with spinal cord injuries, offering dedicated legal support to secure redress.

Instant Case Evaluation

Contact Us Today if you need a Person Injury Lawyer

312-313-2440