LA Dog Bite Law Guide: Reporting a Dog Bite | Los Angeles Dog Bite Laws 2026 | Dog Bite Lawyer & Dog Bite Attorney Los Angeles

By Ted H. Ravan, Ravan Law, Los Angeles

After a dog bite in Los Angeles, most victims are handed a business card at the emergency room, told to report the bite to Animal Services, and left to figure out what happens next. This guide is the plain-English answer. It walks through los angeles dog bite laws as they actually operate: the reporting requirement under Title 17 of the California Code of Regulations section 2606, the 10-day rabies observation quarantine, the impoundment and dangerous dog hearing procedure under Los Angeles Municipal Code sections 53.34.2 and 53.34.4, and (most importantly) why the outcome of that hearing does not decide the owner’s liability for the bite itself. Under California Civil Code section 3342, the owner is strictly liable for the bite regardless of the dog’s history, and Civil Code section 3342.5(f) explicitly states that nothing in the dangerous-dog framework limits section 3342 liability. Where the hearing record does matter is elsewhere: it supports a separate negligence claim, it can support punitive damages where an owner ignored a known danger, it helps establish a landlord’s actual knowledge of a dangerous dog on the property, and it often triggers breed or prior-bite exclusions on the homeowners or renters insurance policy the claim is paid from.

What Happens When You Report a Dog Bite to LA Animal Services

Every dog bite that breaks skin in California must be reported. The obligation runs first through California Health and Safety Code section 121690, which requires physicians, health-care providers, and any person who has knowledge of an animal bite capable of transmitting rabies to report it to the local health officer. In Los Angeles, that means the Los Angeles Department of Animal Services (for bites inside the City of Los Angeles) or the Los Angeles County Department of Public Health, Veterinary Public Health Program (for bites in unincorporated County or in contract cities served by County).

The report itself is short: date, location, description of the dog, owner information if available, and description of the bite. Los Angeles Animal Services or the LA County Veterinary Public Health team receives the report and takes over from there. Two things happen in parallel. First, the biting dog is placed under a 10-day rabies observation quarantine (see next section). Second, if the bite meets thresholds set by Los Angeles Municipal Code section 53.34, an impoundment and dangerous dog hearing process may open.

The reporting duty applies whether the bite happened in a private residence, a City of Los Angeles park, a public sidewalk, a Metro station, an apartment complex hallway, or a commercial property. Failing to report a bite is a misdemeanor in California, and skipping the report also leaves the injured person without an independent record of the incident, which is exactly the record that will matter in every subsequent legal step.

The 10-Day Rabies Quarantine: What It Is and Why It Matters

Under California Code of Regulations Title 17 section 2606, any dog that bites a person is subject to a 10-day rabies observation quarantine starting from the date of the bite. The purpose is public-health surveillance: rabies is fatal but has an incubation window during which the animal shows symptoms before dying. If the biting dog is alive and healthy 10 days after the bite, the person bitten was not exposed to rabies, and post-exposure prophylaxis is not required.

The quarantine can be served in one of three ways depending on the dog’s rabies vaccination status and the individual case:

At the owner’s home (most common for currently vaccinated dogs). The owner signs a home quarantine agreement, keeps the dog isolated from other people and animals, and allows Animal Services to verify the dog remains healthy at the end of the 10 days.
At the owner’s veterinarian. Some owners elect to board the dog at their veterinarian’s kennel during the observation period.
At a Los Angeles Animal Services shelter. Required in cases where the dog’s rabies vaccination cannot be verified, the dog is unvaccinated, the bite was severe, or the owner is unwilling or unable to home-quarantine.

For unvaccinated dogs, the required quarantine is materially longer (typically extended isolation up to six months or, in serious cases, euthanasia and rabies testing). This is one reason a documented rabies vaccination is essential for any dog owner in Los Angeles.

For the bite victim, the 10-day quarantine matters in three practical ways. It produces an independent Animal Services record that documents the bite, the dog, and the owner. It determines whether the victim needs the rabies post-exposure prophylaxis series (a physically difficult and expensive treatment). And where the observation reveals the dog was previously unvaccinated or otherwise out of compliance with los angeles dog bite laws, it starts the paper trail that supports a subsequent negligence claim against the owner.

Impoundment and Dangerous Dog Hearings Under LAMC § 53.34.2 and § 53.34.4

For bites that meet specific severity or history thresholds, Los Angeles Municipal Code section 53.34 opens a second and parallel administrative process: impoundment and a dangerous dog hearing.

Impoundment under LAMC § 53.34.2 authorizes Los Angeles Animal Services to seize a dog that has bitten a person under circumstances that suggest danger to the public. Common triggers include: an unprovoked bite in a public place; a severe bite that caused substantial injury; a repeat bite by the same dog; a bite by a dog that has previously been declared potentially dangerous or vicious; or a bite committed while the dog was running loose in violation of leash requirements. The dog is held at an Animal Services facility during the impoundment period.

The dangerous dog hearing under LAMC § 53.34.4 is an administrative hearing before an Animal Services hearing officer. It considers whether the dog should be declared “potentially dangerous” or “vicious” under municipal definitions, and what conditions or restrictions should apply. Possible outcomes include:

No dangerous designation and return of the dog to the owner
“Potentially dangerous” designation with conditions (registration, mandatory microchipping, insurance, secure enclosure, muzzling in public)
“Vicious” designation, which can require permanent restrictions or, in serious cases, euthanasia
Boarding costs and hearing fees imposed on the owner

The hearing is not a criminal proceeding and it is not a civil damages case. It is an administrative process focused on public safety going forward, not compensation to the bitten person. The bite victim can testify, present evidence, and be represented, but the hearing does not order the owner to pay medical bills or damages.

Why the Hearing Record Does Not Decide the Owner’s Liability

Here is the misunderstanding that costs Los Angeles dog bite victims most often: families sit through the dangerous dog hearing, see the dog declared “not dangerous” and returned to the owner, and assume that outcome means the owner is not liable for the bite. That is wrong.

California Civil Code section 3342 imposes strict liability on the owner of any dog for the damages caused by the bite, when the person bitten was in a public place or lawfully in a private place, regardless of whether the dog had ever bitten anyone before and regardless of the owner’s knowledge of the dog’s character. Prior viciousness is not required. Owner awareness of danger is not required. A history of the dog being well-behaved is not a defense.

California Civil Code section 3342.5(f) removes any ambiguity. It states that nothing in the dangerous-dog statute (section 3342.5) limits liability under section 3342 or any other law. In plain terms: the hearing officer’s conclusion that a dog is not dangerous does not touch the owner’s civil liability for a bite that has already happened. Section 3342 makes the owner strictly liable for the bite as a matter of law. The hearing decides what happens to the dog going forward. The two questions are separate.

There are three important exceptions to section 3342 strict liability that Los Angeles dog bite claims counsel work through in every case:

Military and police dogs performing their duties. Section 3342(b) carves out bites by a dog used in military or police work while the dog was defending itself from an annoying, harassing, or provoking act, or was assisting an employee of the agency in specific enumerated enforcement functions (apprehension of a suspect with reasonable suspicion, investigation of a possible crime, execution of a warrant, or defense of a peace officer or another person). Section 3342(c) and (d) add further carve-outs and require the public agency to have adopted a written policy.
Trespassers. The statute protects a person who was in a public place or lawfully in a private place. A person who was on the property without lawful authority at the time of the bite is generally outside section 3342, though a narrow negligence theory may still apply in unusual cases.
Veterinary professional assumption of risk. Under Nelson v. Hall (1985) 165 Cal.App.3d 709, a veterinarian and veterinary staff bitten by a dog in the course of treating the dog generally cannot bring a strict liability claim under section 3342. Kennel workers, groomers, and dog trainers can face similar assumption-of-risk arguments.

Outside those exceptions, section 3342 is the operative framework for los angeles dog bite laws on the liability question, and the dangerous dog hearing is a separate track.

Where the Hearing Record Actually Matters

The Animal Services record and the dangerous dog hearing outcome do matter, in ways bite victims and their families often do not appreciate. Four categories.

Support for a separate negligence claim. Where the dog had prior bite history, prior aggressive incidents, or was running loose in violation of leash requirements, negligence under California Civil Code section 1714 can be pleaded alongside strict liability. The Animal Services impoundment record, the prior complaint history, and the hearing findings are the evidence that supports the negligence claim.

Punitive damages under Civil Code section 3294. Where the owner knew the dog was dangerous, ignored prior warnings, or violated the specific conditions of a prior “potentially dangerous” designation, the conduct can meet the malice, oppression, or fraud standard for punitive damages under Civil Code section 3294. Punitive damages require clear and convincing evidence and are recoverable only against private defendants; they are not available against a public entity even where the entity is a defendant. The Animal Services record is often the cleanest way to prove the owner had prior notice.

Landlord actual knowledge (Uccello v. Laudenslayer). In California, a landlord is generally not vicariously liable under section 3342 (which applies to the owner of the dog), but a landlord who had actual knowledge of the specific dog’s dangerous propensities and had the ability to remove or control the dog through lease provisions can be liable on a common-law negligence theory. The rule comes from Uccello v. Laudenslayer (1975) 44 Cal.App.3d 504. Prior Animal Services complaints, a prior dangerous dog designation on file, or documented tenant complaints to the landlord are exactly the evidence that establishes actual knowledge under Uccello.

Insurance exclusions on the homeowners or renters policy. The insurance policy that pays the dog bite claim (typically the homeowners policy or renters policy the owner carries) responds under a personal liability provision. A prior Animal Services record, a “potentially dangerous” designation, or a documented prior bite can trigger several carrier responses: policy exclusion for the specific dog, breed-based exclusion (some carriers exclude specific breeds outright), premium increase, or non-renewal at the next term. In serious cases, coverage is denied and the claim proceeds against the owner’s personal assets. Understanding how the hearing record affects coverage is a routine part of los angeles dog bite laws practice.

Bites Involving Dogs from City Shelters and Bites at City Facilities: The Government Claims Act Track

Two categories of Los Angeles dog bite cases sit on a separate legal track from private-owner claims. Both involve the City of Los Angeles or another public entity as a potential defendant, and both trigger the California Government Claims Act.

Bites by dogs adopted from Los Angeles Animal Services with a known bite history. Where a dog with a documented bite history was adopted out to a family from a Los Angeles Animal Services shelter and later bit again, a negligence claim against the City of Los Angeles may be available on the theory that the shelter failed to disclose the bite history or negligently adopted out a dog it knew posed a foreseeable risk. This is a specific and narrow claim, but it does exist, and it turns on the shelter’s own records.

Bites at City-run facilities. A dog bite at a City of Los Angeles park (Griffith Park, Runyon Canyon, Elysian Park, Silver Lake Reservoir, Barnsdall Art Park, and others), at a Los Angeles Department of Recreation and Parks facility, at a public library, at a public school playground, on a public sidewalk with a documented dangerous-dog history in the specific neighborhood, or at another City-owned or City-controlled property can support a dangerous condition of public property claim under California Government Code section 835 alongside the strict liability claim against the dog’s private owner.

When any claim against the City of Los Angeles or any other public entity is potentially available, the six-month administrative claim deadline under California Government Code section 911.2 applies and runs from the date of the bite. The administrative claim must comply with the content requirements of Government Code section 910: claimant name and address, address for notices, date and place of the incident, general description of the injury, name of the public employee(s) involved if known, and amount claimed information. A letter to the City that does not meet the section 910 requirements is not a valid claim.

Once the City denies the administrative claim, the family has six months from the date the rejection notice is personally delivered or deposited in the mail to file the civil lawsuit against the City under Government Code section 945.6(a)(1), or two years from accrual if the City does not act on the claim within 45 days under section 945.6(a)(2). Late-claim relief under Government Code section 911.4 exists but is discretionary and hard to obtain.

Ravan Law is a government-claims focused personal injury firm. This six-month deadline is one of the most consequential deadlines in California personal injury practice and is missed most often by families who wait several months while the medical picture stabilizes before contacting counsel.

Catastrophic Dog Bite Injuries: When the Injury Changes a Life

Not every Los Angeles dog bite case is the same. Cases involving catastrophic outcomes require detailed medical projections, life-care planning, and a legal strategy built around the full lifetime cost of the injury. The categories to watch for:

Traumatic brain injury in a small child struck to the ground during the attack, or in any victim who suffered a head strike. Small children are disproportionately represented in serious dog bite cases because the child’s face is at the same height as a medium or large dog’s mouth.
Severe facial disfigurement requiring multiple reconstructive surgeries and producing lifelong psychological consequences.
Nerve damage to the hand, forearm, or face producing permanent loss of function or chronic pain.
Deep-tissue infection requiring hospitalization, intravenous antibiotic therapy, and (in the worst cases) surgical debridement or amputation. Dog bites carry heavy bacterial loads, and infection complications are more common than families expect.
Multi-point fracture in older adults knocked down by a large dog.
Wrongful death in the rare but real category of fatal dog attacks, most commonly involving small children.

At Ravan Law, catastrophic-injury work, whether from a dog bite, a motor vehicle collision, or a public-entity incident, is the kind of matter the firm is built around, coordinated directly by attorney Ted H. Ravan. The measure of a case at this level is not the emergency room bill; it is the lifetime cost of the injury projected across the injured person’s remaining life expectancy, a projection that requires a life-care planner and a forensic economist to build properly. Insurance carriers move fast on serious cases to settle before that projection is finished. That is exactly why families should not settle in the first three weeks.

Deadlines for Los Angeles Dog Bite Claims

California dog bite claims have two independent deadlines, one civil and one administrative, plus tolling for minor victims. For the full picture, see our guide to California personal injury time limits. Missing any of the three closes off that portion of the case regardless of the strength of the underlying facts.

Deadline	Statute	Applies To
Two years from the date of the bite	Code of Civil Procedure section 335.1	Civil lawsuit against the dog owner and other private defendants
Six months from the date of the bite	Government Code section 911.2	Administrative claim against the City of Los Angeles or any other public-entity defendant (city shelter negligence, bite at City-run facility)
Six months from rejection notice	Government Code section 945.6(a)(1)	Civil lawsuit against the public entity after the claim is rejected
Two-year clock does not start running until age 18, giving until the child’s 20th birthday to file	Code of Civil Procedure section 352(a)	Personal injury claim on behalf of a minor bite victim

The minor tolling under section 352(a) applies to the two-year civil deadline but does not toll the six-month Government Code section 911.2 deadline in the same way. A child bitten at a City of Los Angeles park still needs the six-month administrative claim filed inside the six-month window from the date of the bite. The two-year civil clock, by contrast, does not begin running until the child turns 18, giving the child until their 20th birthday to file the civil claim in their own name. Government Code section 911.4 provides limited late-claim relief specifically for minors, but the relief is discretionary and has its own outside deadline.

Any settlement on behalf of a minor requires court approval through the minor’s compromise process under Probate Code sections 3500 et seq., with settlement funds held under Probate Code sections 3600 et seq., typically in a blocked account until the child reaches majority.

Related Practice Areas at Ravan Law

A Los Angeles dog bite case shares its evidence discipline and deadline framework with the rest of the firm’s serious injury practice.

Personal Injury. A Los Angeles personal injury lawyer at Ravan Law (also referenced as Ravan Injury Law) builds every case on the personal injury foundation of duty, breach, causation, and damages, and calibrates the effort and expert workup to the seriousness of the injury.
Dog Bite. The primary focus of this guide. A Los Angeles dog bite lawyer applies California Civil Code section 3342 strict liability alongside the parallel Animal Services and dangerous-dog administrative track, and a dog bite lawyer Los Angeles families rely on for a serious facial-injury matter or a case involving a child works the Uccello v. Laudenslayer landlord analysis, the Civil Code section 3294 punitive damages analysis, and the Probate Code minor’s compromise process for child settlements.
Car Accident. A Los Angeles car accident lawyer handles standard collision matters on the same negligence framework. A car accident lawyer Los Angeles residents call after a serious crash runs the same evidence-preservation discipline described in the deadline section above.
Truck Accident. A Los Angeles truck accident lawyer handles commercial trucking matters under the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Regulations overlay.
Uber Car Accident. An Uber accident lawyer Los Angeles rideshare victims call handles Uber car accident matters under the California TNC framework, updated to reflect SB 371 effective January 1, 2026 (Phase 3 UM/UIM at $60,000 per person / $300,000 per accident; Phase 3 third-party liability at $1 million when the rideshare driver is at fault; Phase 2 at $50,000 per person / $100,000 per incident bodily injury / $30,000 property damage plus a $200,000 excess liability policy).
Slips & Falls. A Los Angeles slip and fall lawyer handles premises liability for serious falls, and a slip and fall lawyer Los Angeles residents call for a matter in a commercial center runs the constructive-notice analysis under California pattern jury instructions.

Whether the matter is a dog bite personal injury claim, a car accident, an Uber car accident, a truck accident, or a slip and fall, the two-year statute of limitations under Code of Civil Procedure section 335.1 governs the private-defendant portion, and the six-month administrative claim deadline under Government Code section 911.2 governs the public-entity portion where one applies.

A Look at How These Cases Can Unfold

The following hypothetical scenarios illustrate how these cases can unfold. They are not based on any specific client and are provided for educational purposes only.

Scenario one: adult bitten on a Silver Lake sidewalk with prior Animal Services complaints on the dog. A 42-year-old walking home on a residential Silver Lake sidewalk is bitten on the forearm by a large dog that pushes through a partially open front gate. The Los Angeles Animal Services record shows two prior complaints about the same dog at the same address, one from a mail carrier six months earlier and one from a neighbor three months earlier. The dog is impounded under LAMC section 53.34.2 and a dangerous dog hearing is opened under LAMC section 53.34.4. The Los Angeles dog bite attorney pleads strict liability under Civil Code section 3342 against the owner, negligence under section 1714 (the owner had prior notice and did nothing), punitive damages under Civil Code section 3294 (the owner’s failure to secure the dog after two prior complaints meets the conscious disregard standard), and a claim against the landlord under Uccello v. Laudenslayer (the tenant’s lease permitted the dog, tenant complaints reached the landlord in writing, and the landlord retained the right to require removal). The homeowners insurance carrier denies coverage under the policy’s prior-bite exclusion after reviewing the Animal Services record; the case then proceeds against the owner’s and landlord’s assets. The two-year Code of Civil Procedure section 335.1 deadline governs.

Scenario two: child bitten in the face at Griffith Park by a dog adopted from a City of Los Angeles shelter. A 6-year-old is bitten in the face by an off-leash dog at Griffith Park. Investigation reveals the dog was adopted from a Los Angeles Animal Services shelter two months earlier, and the shelter’s internal records show a documented bite history the shelter did not disclose to the adopting family at the point of adoption. The Los Angeles dog bite attorney pleads strict liability under section 3342 against the adopting owner, files a Government Code section 910 administrative claim against the City of Los Angeles within the six-month window on a shelter negligence theory (the shelter failed to disclose a known bite history), and evaluates a parallel dangerous condition of public property claim under Government Code section 835 for the Griffith Park bite location. The child’s medical trajectory unfolds over 18 months, including plastic surgery revision, ongoing child psychology care, and long-term outlook. Any settlement on the child’s behalf goes through the Probate Code section 3500 et seq. minor’s compromise process, with settlement funds held under sections 3600 et seq. in a blocked account. The two-year civil deadline does not begin running until the child turns 18 under Code of Civil Procedure section 352(a), giving the child until their 20th birthday to file the civil claim in their own name. The Government Code section 911.2 six-month administrative claim does not toll the same way and was preserved by filing inside the six-month window from the date of the bite.

Scenario three: knocked-off-a-bicycle case in DTLA. A cyclist commuting through DTLA is thrown from her bicycle after a large off-leash dog lunges into the bike lane. She fractures her wrist and dislocates her shoulder. There is no bite. Section 3342 strict liability does not apply because the injury was not a bite; the case is pleaded on ordinary negligence under Civil Code section 1714 against the dog owner for failing to control the dog on a busy urban street. The Animal Services record documents the dog was running loose in violation of leash requirements. The two-year Code of Civil Procedure section 335.1 deadline governs; no government-entity claim is triggered on these facts.

Frequently Asked Questions

Is California a “one bite” state?

No. California is a strict liability dog bite state under Civil Code section 3342, not a one bite state. The owner is liable for the bite regardless of whether the dog had any prior bite history and regardless of whether the owner had any reason to know the dog was dangerous. The “one free bite” rule that still applies in some other states does not apply to bite cases in California.

Do los angeles dog bite laws require me to report the bite?

Yes. California Health and Safety Code section 121690 requires all animal bites capable of transmitting rabies to be reported to the local health officer, and every Los Angeles-area animal control agency operates a bite reporting protocol. Reporting triggers the 10-day rabies observation quarantine and creates an independent record of the bite that will be essential evidence in the civil case.

What is the 10-day quarantine?

Under California Code of Regulations Title 17 section 2606, any dog that bites a person is subject to a 10-day rabies observation quarantine. The purpose is public-health surveillance for rabies. The quarantine is typically served at the owner’s home for vaccinated dogs and at a shelter for unvaccinated dogs or serious bite cases.

Does the dangerous dog hearing decide whether the owner has to pay?

No. The Los Angeles Municipal Code section 53.34.4 dangerous dog hearing is an administrative process focused on public safety going forward. It does not decide the owner’s civil liability for the bite. Under Civil Code section 3342, the owner is strictly liable regardless of the hearing outcome, and Civil Code section 3342.5(f) confirms that nothing in the dangerous-dog framework limits section 3342 liability.

What if the hearing officer decides the dog is not dangerous?

That decision does not decide the owner’s civil liability for the bite. Strict liability under section 3342 applies to the bite as a matter of law, independent of the dangerous-dog designation. The hearing decides what happens to the dog going forward. The civil claim decides the compensation for the injury.

When does the hearing record matter?

For a separate negligence claim under Civil Code section 1714 where the dog had prior history, for punitive damages under Civil Code section 3294 where the owner ignored a known danger, for establishing landlord actual knowledge under Uccello v. Laudenslayer, and for insurance coverage analysis (prior-bite and breed exclusions).

What are the deadlines to file a Los Angeles dog bite claim?

Two years from the date of the bite under Code of Civil Procedure section 335.1 for the civil lawsuit against the dog owner. Six months from the date of the bite under Government Code section 911.2 for an administrative claim against the City of Los Angeles or any other public entity (if a public-entity theory applies, such as shelter negligence or a bite at a City-run facility). For minors, the two-year civil deadline is tolled until age 18 under Code of Civil Procedure section 352(a), giving until the child’s 20th birthday to file. The six-month Government Code deadline is not tolled the same way for minors.

What if the dog was adopted from a City of Los Angeles shelter with a known bite history?

A shelter negligence claim against the City of Los Angeles may be available on the theory that the shelter failed to disclose a known bite history at adoption. This is a public-entity claim triggering the six-month Government Code section 911.2 administrative claim deadline. The strict liability claim against the current owner under Civil Code section 3342 proceeds in parallel on the two-year civil deadline.

Can a landlord be sued for a tenant’s dog bite in Los Angeles?

Sometimes. Under Uccello v. Laudenslayer (1975), a landlord who had actual knowledge of the specific dog’s dangerous propensities and had the ability to remove or control the dog through lease provisions can be liable on a common-law negligence theory. Actual knowledge is the operative requirement; constructive knowledge is generally not enough. The Los Angeles Animal Services record, prior tenant complaints in writing, or a prior dangerous dog designation are typically the evidence that establishes actual knowledge.

What damages can a Los Angeles dog bite victim recover?

Two categories of compensatory damages: economic damages (past and future medical expenses, scar revision surgery, mental health treatment, past and future lost wages, loss of earning capacity where the injury impairs a career) and non-economic damages (pain and suffering, emotional distress, permanent disfigurement, loss of enjoyment of life, loss of consortium for a spouse). Punitive damages are a separate third category under Civil Code section 3294, available against private defendants where the clear and convincing evidence standard of malice, oppression, or fraud is met. Punitive damages are not recoverable against public entities under Government Code section 818.

Should I settle with the homeowners insurance in the first few weeks?

Almost never in a serious case. The medical picture in a serious dog bite case is not fully developed until months after the bite, which is one reason serious injury cases take time. Scarring takes six to twelve months to mature before a plastic surgeon can offer a durable revision plan. Post-traumatic anxiety and dog phobia require several months of treatment before a durable prognosis. Nerve injury outcomes take time to declare. Infection complications can extend for months. A carrier who settles at week three has priced against the emergency room bill and the first orthopedic follow-up, and has excluded everything above.

Does the same team handle dog bite, car accident, Uber car accident, slip and fall, and truck accident matters?

Yes. A Los Angeles personal injury lawyer, a Los Angeles dog bite lawyer, a Los Angeles car accident lawyer, an Uber accident lawyer Los Angeles rideshare victims call, a Los Angeles slip and fall lawyer, and a Los Angeles truck accident lawyer are all the same team at Ravan Law.

Speak Directly With Attorney Ted H. Ravan

If you or your child has been seriously injured in a dog bite in Los Angeles or anywhere in Southern California, the decisions made in the first days and weeks matter more than most families realize. The two-year personal injury deadline under Code of Civil Procedure section 335.1 seems generous, but the six-month administrative claim deadline under Government Code section 911.2 begins running on the day of the bite whenever a City shelter, a City-run facility, or another public-entity theory is potentially involved. Insurance carriers move within days on serious bites; a settlement offered in the first three weeks is priced against the emergency room bill, not against the scarring picture that will develop over the next twelve months.

Contact Ravan Law to speak directly with attorney Ted H. Ravan. Every case receives personal attention from the attorney, not a case manager. Consultations are free and confidential. Call (424) 465-2500 to discuss your case, whether the bite happened on a Silver Lake sidewalk, in Griffith Park, in a residential neighborhood in Santa Monica or West Hollywood, at a City of Los Angeles facility, or anywhere else across Los Angeles and Southern California.

Attorney Advertising. Ted Ravan, Ravan Law, Los Angeles, CA. This content is general information, not legal advice. Every case depends on its specific facts.