You are on page 1of 4

POND LAW FIRM

SAMUEL D. POND
ATTORNEY AT LAW
2785 CONNOR STREET
SALT LAKE CITY, UT 84109
(858)231.7970
July 21, 2015

Brockton Fire and Casualty Company


Attention: Jed Witzer- Agent
14440 Grandular Road, Starville, Brockton 00011
Re:

Our Clients: Carol & Sarah Robertson


Your Insured: Helen & Marvin Adcock
Date of Incident: 7.29.2001
Claim No: 123-456-789

Dear Mr. & Mrs. Adcock,


This letter is sent on behalf of Carol and Sarah Robertson. The intent is to come to
a settlement involving the incident of July 29, 2001. In which three year old, at the time
of the incident, Sarah Robertson received one or more bits to the face from Bear. Bear, a
dog of mixed breed has some beagle hound in him, was 5 years old at the time of the
incident. Enclosed are records and reports in support of Sarahs injury and psychological
treatment claims:

Starville Police Report


Interview with Carol Robertson
Deposition of Helen Adcock
Starville Childrens Medical Center- Physicians Orders
Starville Childrens Medical Center- Plastic Surgery Clinic
Starville Childrens Medical Center- Therapy Evaluation
Starville Childrens Medical Center- Medical Treatment Summary
Psychological Evaluation- Dr. Timothy V. Ward
Homeowners Insurance Policy
Photographs of the Plaintiffs Injuries
LIABILITY

As you know, on July 29, 2001 Helen Adcocks dog Bear attacked and bit then
three year old Sarah Robertson on the face. This is not the first time that Bear has
attacked an innocent child. Mrs. Adcock is strictly liable for the attack on Sarah because
of the knowledge that she possesses about Bears previous attack. Also the statutes of
Utah state that she is strictly liable because of this knowledge.

Your insured is strictly liable following Utah Code Title 18-1-1, which states,
every person is liable for the injuries caused by their dog. It does not need to be proven
that the dog was vicious or that the owners knew of this aggressive behavior. Which is
not the case as Mrs. Adcock testified of Bears previous incidents.
Your insured also aced negligently with how she handled her dog after each
attack. There was little evidence of any punishment that the dog received to deter it from
every attacking people again. She had Bear upstairs away from people because she knew
that the dog could not handle being around others. Helen negligently failed to put the dog
back upstairs when she realized that the dog was out. Instead she only had knee-jerk
reactions after the second attack to make things safer for those around her, these include;
putting up a fence, being more vigilant about warning those around her, and keeping Bear
away from children. All of these precautions should have been taken after the first time
he attacked someone, regardless if it was provoked because of his ear infections.
MEDICAL TREATMENT
Sarah received lots of medical treatments. Regarding her immediate injuries, scars
left behind, and the potential need from plastic surgery have all cause her great distress.
Such distress that she had to undergo a psychological evaluation.
After the incident Sarah was rushed via ambulance immediately to Childrens
Medical Center where she stayed for three days. She received Emergency Room
treatment as well as facial plastic surgery. At this time she also received over 100 stitches,
such an attack that the Doctors wondered if she did receive more than one bite rather
quickly. The Dr treating her also placed sutures in her, which was very uncomfortable for
her. The sutures caused her much pain and suffering, crying uncontrollably when she was
having those removed.
After being discharged she came into the hospital to have the suture and stitches
removed. Sarah Robertson suffered a great deal that day, having to be held down by
family member so that the doctors could do their job. She was traumatized by the attack
so much that she could not carry on a normal life.
Sarah was subject to psychological evaluations, in which it was recommended
that she receive treatment for what she was dealing with. Which according to Nancy
Bostick included, possible signs of self-loathing, embarrassment because of her scars,
fear of dogs, and to be less cheerful than she had been before the accident. She refused to
talk to people about the incident. She has been known to ask people if they knew when
she was pretty. She also has developed as someone very guarded when dogs are
around. She acts well with others around her, just not dogs even ones that she knows.
Sarah and Carol have also consulted a plastic surgeon to figure out what it is that
Sarah needs to have fixed so that she does not have to live her whole life severely
disfigured. She will be slightly disfigured no matter what the plastic surgeons can do. She
has been evaluated seven times in the last two years. Each time the doctor is looking to

see if all of her scars are ready to be worked on. As of right now she has not received any
plastic surgery to hide her scars, just the plastic surgery that occurred on the day of the
accident.
There is a copy of forms sustaining each of the items specifically.
DAMAGES
There have been many medical costs accrued by Sarah Robertson in connection to
the case at hand. On the day of the incident she accrued $1048.15 in medical bills. These
were covered by the insurance that her family purchased. However, Utah has adopted the
collateral source rule, Sarah is entitled to claim the full amount of her medical bills, not
have them reduced to the amount paid by the insurance. She also had to undergo other
evaluations for plastic surgery that resulted in $140 in costs. She still has not been cleared
to undergo plastic surgery so she will have to continue to receive these evaluations until
she is ready to have the plastic surgery done. She also underwent, along with her parents,
psychological evaluations. She showed signs of possibly needing more sessions so as to
allow Sarah more time to open up to a professional. The evaluations cost $100 for Sarah
and $225 for her parents to receive psychological treatment. The total damages for
medical expenses are $1513.15. We seek this amount in the settlement that is to be
offered.
In her next interview she opened up about her fear of dogs. She also feels not as
pretty, as she constantly asks people what they think about her and if they knew her when
she was pretty. These two fears can be overcome, but once the fear or idea of not being
pretty enough have taken hold it is a long road back to where Sarah should be. Sarah
expressed these two ideas and nothing more than that. The surgery could cost as little as
$4,200, this price is without the cost of the operating room and anesthesia. The treatment
very well could help out the psychological part of Sarah, as she is very self-conscious
about her disfigurement. She recently decided to tell people the truth as to how she was
became disfigured.
Sarah was in great pain throughout the ordeal of going to the emergency room,
having her stitches removed, having to be cautious when it came to the types of food that
she would intake, and the emotional stress that is placed on her. She was documented as
having screamed and cried in pain while in the hospital receiving and having her stitches
removed. She had to stick to softer foods and could not use even a straw for some time,
so that her stitches would not come out. The emotional distress of fearing dogs has
caused her to be tense whenever she is around dogs, even ones that she has known all of
her life. She has suffered humiliation, depression and a loss of enjoyment of life. She has
people constantly asking about what happened to her face. She asks people constantly if
they think that she is pretty even with her disfigurement. She also will not have as many
career opportunities because of what happened to her. As people with disfigurements
rarely work in anything that involves having to be seen by the public. She is very unlikely
to take on challenges that could cast light on to her disfigurement. This is documented by
many studies of those who have suffered from facial disfigurements.

SETTLEMENT DEMAND
Given the above information we seek to settle for $80,000 in combined
Compensatory and General Damages. This is not even the full amount of coverage in the
policy purchased by the Adcocks.