Case Study: Denver-Area Dog Bite Claim with Six Figure Settlement
Denver is a very dog-friendly city, and it’s common to see dogs present in a variety of public spaces. While most dogs are well-behaved, it’s always possible for them to become aggressive and attack if they are provoked or feel threatened. Dog bite attacks often result in serious injuries that require extensive medical care. In addition, it’s common to require psychological counseling if you experience post-traumatic stress disorder from the dog attack.
Due to the severity of dog bite injuries, it’s important to work with an attorney who has extensive experience handling these cases. At Pushchak Law, dog bite cases are a primary area of focus, and Brian Pushchak has the experience necessary to help you recover the compensation you deserve. The following case study highlights a recent result we were able to achieve for a Denver-area client who suffered serious dog bite injuries.
Case Overview
The case involved a dog bite attack in a common space at a Denver-area apartment complex. Our client was a woman in her mid-30’s who lived alone in a pet-friendly suburban apartment complex and worked in a hybrid office position.
Our client was using the apartment complex’s fenced dog area with her leashed small dog when a neighbor entered with a large, mixed-breed dog off leash, despite posted rules requiring leashes in common areas. The dog immediately charged and knocked our client to the ground, repeatedly biting her right calf and forearm while she tried to shield her dog. The attacking dog had a history of aggressive behavior and prior complaints to management. In addition, there was a broken gate latch in the dog area which allowed the dog to push through and made it difficult for bystanders to intervene quickly. The lack of on-site enforcement enabled the situation to escalate further than it should have.
The injured victim was an avid runner and hiker with no meaningful prior orthopedic or psychological problems. She regularly used the complex’s dog area with her small rescue dog and chose this property as her place of residence specifically because of its dog-friendly marketing and amenities.
Additional Case Details
Fault:
The attacking dog’s owner was primarily at fault for failing to control a known aggressive dog and violating leash rules. The corporate property owner and management company also shared liability for ignoring repeated tenant complaints about the aggressive dog and failing to enforce their own safety policies.
Injuries:
Our client suffered:
- Multiple deep puncture and tearing wounds to her right calf and forearm
- A concussion from striking her head when she fell
- Permanent scarring
- Residual nerve pain
- Significant psychological injuries including PTSD, anxiety around dogs and sleep disturbance
Medical Treatment Timeline:
- Day of the Attack – An ambulance transported our client to the ER where she received treatment that included wound cleaning, sutures, rabies and tetanus shots, and pain management
- First 3 Months – Follow-up medical visits with primary care and wound care, a referral to a plastic surgeon, and the initiation of physical therapy for leg weakness and gait changes
- Months 3-12 – Plastic surgery consultations and scar management, continued physical therapy, initiation of psychological counseling and diagnosed PTSD
- Beyond 12 Months – Ongoing counseling, intermittent flare-ups of pain and functional limitations, and evaluation of future treatment needs
Legal Challenges
This case presented several legal challenges.
Multiple Defendants
We were seeking to hold the dog’s owner and an out-of-state corporate landlord liable for our client’s injuries.
Notice of the Dog’s Prior Aggressive Behavior Was Disputed
Internal records of prior complaints were incomplete, and some witnesses were initially reluctant to get involved. Demonstrating that management actually knew about the dog’s behavior required piecing together emails, maintenance requests and tenant testimony.
Overlapping Theories of Liability
Colorado dog bite laws adhere to strict liability. This means dog owners are responsible for any attacks committed by their pet, regardless of whether they acted negligently. However, premises liability law requires proof of negligence in order to hold the defendant accountable for injuries. The property owner’s insurance company argued that the attack was unforeseeable and that the lease placed full responsibility for pets on tenants. They also claimed the broken gate latch was unrelated to the attack and tried to minimize the role of relaxed rule enforcement on the severity of our client’s injuries.
Comparative Negligence Claims
The defendants also tried to claim our client was partially at fault. They argued she should have waited to enter the dog area when she saw the other tenant approaching and that her attempts to shield her own dog contributed to the escalation of the attack. In addition, they claimed she “overreacted” by calling 911 instead of seeking urgent care on her own.
Prior Injuries
The defense highlighted an old minor knee injury and intermittent anxiety treated years earlier to argue that some of our client’s current limitations and psychological symptoms were unrelated or exaggerated.
Insurance Issues
The dog owner had limited homeowners coverage, and the property owner’s insurance carrier initially denied coverage, invoking a variety of the policy’s exclusions and claiming they weren’t liable for tenants’ animals. Coordinating insurance coverage and getting the property owner’s insurance company to participate meaningfully in the settlement required extensive negotiation.
Our Strategy
Our client wanted both the dog’s owner and the corporate landlord to be held accountable for their role in the attack. In addition, she was seeking:
- Full coverage of her medical and mental health treatment
- Compensation for her scarring, pain and disrupted lifestyle
- Enough financial security to move to a safer home without taking on additional debt
Investigating the Attack
Mr. Pushchak took the following steps to investigate the incident and gather all necessary evidence to build a strong case:
- He acted quickly to secure surveillance video and 911 recordings before they were overwritten
- He conducted detailed tenant interviews to document prior lunging, snapping and near-bite incidents involving the same dog
- He requested and obtained internal emails, incident reports and maintenance logs showing notice of both the dog’s behavior and the broken gate latch
Expert Witnesses
Mr. Pushchak worked with a variety of experts to strengthen our claim. The following expert witnesses provided insights that established liability and demonstrated the extent of our client’s injuries:
- A canine behavior expert explained why the dog’s prior behavior made an attack foreseeable and why leash rules were critical
- A property management/landlord-tenant industry expert addressed reasonable safety practices and explained the gap between the complex’s marketing and its enforcement of its established dog rules
- A plastic surgeon described the nature, permanence and functional impact of our client’s scarring
- A psychologist specializing in trauma evaluated and explained our client’s PTSD, as well as her long-term mental health prognosis
Key Legal Arguments
Mr. Pushchak argued that Colorado’s strict liability laws made the dog’s owner responsible for the injuries our client sustained. In addition, he used premises liability statutes to establish the property owner’s negligence since they failed to enforce leash policies, ignored known hazards on the property and allowed a known aggressive dog to remain in common areas.
Our legal arguments holding the property owner liable emphasized their failure to provide notice of a broken gate latch that impacted safety, the foreseeability of this attack due to the dog’s documented history, and the property owner’s economic incentive to market the complex as dog-friendly while cutting corners on safety.
Our Negotiation Approach
Mr. Pushchak filed the lawsuit early rather than waiting on voluntary cooperation from the two defendants. In addition, he used targeted written discovery and depositions to get documented admissions about prior complaints and broken safety systems. He also prepared thoroughly for trial to create a real risk for both defendants’ insurance carriers. We entered into mediation after depositions were taken, with a firm stance that offers which ignored PTSD and future care would not be accepted.
Turning Points to the Case
There were several turning points which helped sway the outcome in our favor:
- We included a deposition of a former leasing agent who confirmed that tenants had complained about the dog and that management discouraged formal written reports
- We submitted expert reports that clearly tied our client’s psychological injuries and functional limitations to the dog bite attack
- Our property management expert provided compelling testimony that the complex fell below industry standards based on its “pet-friendly” branding
Outcome of the Case
The case took about 22 months from the date of the dog bite attack to the final settlement, with approximately 10 months of active litigation after filing the lawsuit. The case was resolved shortly after key depositions were taken and mediation sessions were held.
We secured a confidential settlement for our client in the mid-six-figure range. This settlement, which was reached shortly before trial, was paid jointly by the dog owner’s insurance company and the property owner’s commercial general liability insurance policy.
The combined initial offers barely exceeded our client’s past medical expenses, and they offered minimal compensation for future care and non-economic damages such as pain and suffering. The final settlement was several times higher and meaningfully recognized her scarring, PTSD and the lifestyle impact of the dog bite attack. The final damage award included:
- Full payment of past medical expenses and therapy
- Funds earmarked for future medical and psychological care
- Compensation for lost wages and reduced work capacity during recovery
- Significant non-economic damages for pain, suffering, scarring, and loss of enjoyment of running, hiking and dog-related activities
Impact on the Client
Prior to the settlement, our client wasn’t able to pay off her medical bills, continue needed therapy and move to a safer community without taking on high-interest debt. The settlement eliminated all outstanding balances for medical bills, provided a cushion for future treatment and replaced income lost during the months when she couldn’t work full-time. This allowed her to focus on healing rather than worrying about how to pay for care.
With consistent therapy and reduced financial stress, our client gradually returned to full-time work. She also resumed light jogging and hiking, although she still has some physical and emotional limitations, and she remains cautious around unfamiliar dogs.
Overall, our client was very happy with the outcome of the case. She expressed strong satisfaction with the representation, particularly appreciating regular communication, clear explanations of each stage of the case, and Mr. Pushchak’s willingness to prepare for trial rather than accepting low offers.
“After I was attacked by a neighbor’s dog in my apartment complex, I was overwhelmed by injuries, medical bills, and two different insurance companies pointing fingers at each other. Brian took over everything so I could focus on healing. He kept me informed at every step, brought in the right experts, and refused to let the insurers minimize my PTSD, scarring, or the impact on my active lifestyle. In the end, he held both the dog’s owner and the corporate landlord accountable and secured a settlement that paid my medical bills, covered future treatment, and gave me the financial security to move to a safer home. I’m incredibly grateful for his thorough preparation and steady, honest communication throughout a very stressful process.”
Key Takeaways for Dog Bite Victims
Dog bite cases can be complex because they often involve both the dog owner and other responsible parties, such as landlords or property managers who fail to act on warning signs. Reporting prior incidents, preserving evidence, and seeking prompt medical and mental health care are critical for safety and for building a strong claim.
When a serious dog attack happens in a “pet-friendly” environment, tenants don’t have to choose between their safety and their housing. An experienced attorney can hold both dog owners and corporate landlords accountable, allowing you to pursue a result that truly addresses your long-term needs, not just immediate medical bills.
This case demonstrates the ways in which working with an attorney who has experience handling complex, multi-defendant dog bite and premises liability cases, uncovering internal notice and policy failures, and persuasively presenting both physical and psychological injuries can significantly impact the overall outcome to your case.
Pushchak Law Can Help After a Dog Bite Attack
If you’ve been injured in a dog bite attack in the Denver area, Pushchak Law can help you recover the compensation you deserve. Brian Pushchak has made dog bite cases a primary focus of his practice. This specialization gives him a deeper understanding of the complex laws, medical issues and multi-party liability matters associated with these cases than is possible when you work with an attorney who hasn’t focused their energy on these cases. Mr. Pushchak’s expertise in Colorado dog bite law will give you the edge you need to maximize the value of your compensation.
You’ll also benefit from Mr. Pushchak’s unique Informed Decisions™ Approach focused on helping you achieve the best possible outcome to your case. With this approach, you remain in control of the process from start to finish, and you’ll be armed with all the information you need to play an active role in determining the strategy used for your claim. Mr. Pushchak will discuss your goals for the outcome of your case with you in detail. He’ll then explain your legal rights and options, giving you a chance to ask any questions you may have regarding his recommended strategy. While Mr. Pushchak will recommend the best approach to achieve your goals, you will always have final say in how we handle your case. This ensures our team remains aligned with your interests throughout the entire process.
Contact us today to schedule a free consultation. Pushchak Law serves clients in Denver and the surrounding areas.
Free Case Consultation
If you have been injured and would like to speak with one of our attorneys, take advantage of our free, no-obligation consultation. And if you have a viable case, there are no fees until we win.
Call 303.372.6145
