Florida Dog Bite Law FirmAbout The Florida Dog Bite Law Firm
This is a Florida practice built around one kind of case: injuries caused by dogs.
That focus is not a marketing position, it is a practical one. Dog bite claims turn on a small set of statutory provisions that most personal injury practices touch a few times a year — the percentage reduction for a victim’s own fault, the “Bad Dog” sign, the separate statute for injuries that are not bites, and the question of which insurance policy actually responds. Knowing where those arguments come from before they arrive changes how a case is handled from the first week.
How we write about the law
Everything on this site is written from the statutory text, and statutes are quoted exactly rather than paraphrased. If a provision says “Bad Dog,” we do not write “Beware of Dog” and hope nobody checks.
Where Florida law is genuinely unsettled, we say so. The clearest example is the filing deadline: there is a real argument that a pure § 767.04 claim carries four years rather than two, and we tell people to work from two anyway, because being early costs nothing and being late ends the claim. A page that picks the more comfortable answer and states it flatly is not being helpful.
Statistics come from named sources with the year attached. We do not publish numbers we cannot point at.
What you will hear in the first conversation
Whether you appear to have a claim, including when you do not. A free case review that ends in “this is not a case worth bringing” is the review working. You should get that answer quickly rather than being managed toward a retainer.
What to photograph today. This is usually the most valuable thing said in a first call. Wounds stop photographing well within weeks, signs get replaced, and animal control files close. Evidence captured in the first days cannot be recreated later, and its absence is what quietly weakens otherwise strong claims.
Where the argument against you is likely to come from. Usually the fault percentage, sometimes a posted sign. Neither is a reason to avoid a claim; both are reasons to know what is coming before an adjuster asks a friendly question about what you were doing.
What you will not hear is a number. Anyone who quotes a settlement figure before seeing medical records and identifying the available insurance is guessing, and the guess sets an expectation that has to be walked back later.
What this does not include
No guarantees. No outcome is promised, and past results in other matters do not predict what happens in yours.
No pressure. If you want to think about it, read the rest of the site first — it is all free, ungated, and written to be useful whether or not you ever call.
No cost to ask. Dog bite claims are handled on contingency: the fee comes out of a recovery, and if there is no recovery there is no fee. Florida also caps contingency percentages by rule, which is unusual and worth understanding.
On breeds
This site publishes a fair amount about Florida’s statewide preemption of breed-specific laws, and there are no photographs of dogs anywhere on it.
Both of those are deliberate and they are the same decision. Florida law now assesses dangerousness by what an individual animal has done, not by what it looks like. That is the correct approach, it is better for victims than breed bans ever were, and a site arguing it in words while illustrating it with a snarling stock photograph would be arguing against itself.
What protects people is holding owners accountable for their own dog’s conduct. That is exactly what § 767.04 does, and it is the whole of this practice.