DOG BITE ATTORNEY
IN STRATFORD, CONNECTICUT

If you or a loved one have been bitten by a dog in Connecticut, don’t attempt to navigate the legal system alone. You need an attorney with success in trying and/or settling dog bite cases. Call Attorney Raymond W. Ganim – Personal Injury Law today at 203-377-7700 for a free review of your case.

Connecticut has strict leash laws and some local cities and towns within Connecticut have their own leash ordinances. Leash laws state that it is illegal to allow your dog to roam free, off-leash. According to the State of Connecticut, by law, a dog’s owner or keeper is liable for any damage caused by his or her dog to a person’s body or property, unless the damage was sustained while the person was trespassing.^[1], teasing, abusing, or tormenting the dog. Additionally, dog owners can be held liable if they did not obey the laws regarding rabies vaccines should you suffer from rabies after being injured by their dog. Even if you don’t get rabies, if you have to undergo rabies treatment, the dog owner would be responsible for the pain, suffering, and inconvenience of the rabies treatments.

DOG BITES ARE TRAUMATIC AND DANGEROUS.

Attorney Raymond W. Ganim – Personal Injury Law has experience in dog bite cases and can help you file paperwork, gather evidence, negotiate your case, and get the compensation that you deserve. This compensation could include:

• Prescription Pills
• Physical Therapy
• Medical Bills
• Surgery
• Pain and Suffering
• Loss of Income
• Therapy
• Depression

At times, punitive damages may be warranted if the dog owner acted in such a reprehensible manner that the Court feels they must be punished.

If you have been attacked by a dog in Connecticut, you may be able to pursue compensation for your medical bills, lost earnings, and other damages and expenses.

Call Attorney Raymond W. Ganim – Personal Injury Law at 203-377-7700 today. You concentrate on healing. We’ll concentrate on your case.

[1] The Connecticut Supreme Court noted in 1953 that: the word ‘trespass’ as employed in the exception refers to something more serious than the mere technical trespass of entering upon the land of another where neither intent to damage nor damage in fact is involved, and where no acts are committed which would naturally arouse an ordinary dog to action to protect its owner’s property or family (Verrilli v. Damilowski, 140 Conn. 358, 363 (1953) (citations and internal quotations omitted)).