Average Dog Bite Settlement in South Carolina: Calculator and Expert Legal Guide 2025

Average dog bite settlements in South Carolina is best communicated as a band tied to severity and proof. South Carolina practitioner sources cite bands around $60,000–$225,000 in 2025, with example-set “averages” near $136,000. Nationally, homeowners insurers reported a 2024 average cost per dog‑bite‑related claim of roughly $69,000, which signals macro pricing pressure yet does not replace South Carolina’s statute‑driven outcomes

The settlements are priced by statute‑triggered liability, 51% modified comparative negligence, injury severity, and practical ceilings from policy limits. This article is a comprehensive guide on the dog bite compensations in South Carolina.

For a fairly accurate and realistic calculation, you can use the calculator below:

Dog Bite Settlement Rules in South Carolina

South Carolina uses a statutory strict‑liability model for dog attacks. As per S.C. Code § 47‑3‑110, owners and keepers are responsible when a dog “bites or otherwise attacks” a person in public or while the person is lawfully on private property, subject to specified defenses. Statutory provocation and a narrowly drawn law‑enforcement K‑9 exception require certification, command compliance, and adherence to written policy to qualify

Settlement value then turns on injury severity, non‑economic damages, comparative‑fault findings, and insurance capacity.

There is one more lever that matters in South Carolina. It’s the modified comparative negligence rule with a 51% bar—recovery is available at 50% fault or less and barred at 51% or more, so fault allocation near the threshold is outcome‑determinative.

Further, South Carolina has a tight timeframe of a three‑year period to file and settle the claim. This forces earlier decision points on demands, expert consults, and filing to avoid leverage decay near the deadline.

Translating these rules to settlement is an easy calculation. The gross compensatory damages are reduced by the plaintiff’s fault. However, at 51% or more fault, the victim’s net recovery is zero.

Average Dog Bite Settlement in South Carolina in 2025 Context

Multiple SC firms like Hopkins Law Firm, 2025 and Shelly Leeke Law reported typical settlement corridors around $60,000–$225,000 for moderate‑to‑serious injury patterns. On average, $136,000 is the average settlement value for dog bites in South Carolina.

The average settlements in South Carolina are higher than the national average of $69,000 in 2024 (The Insurance Information Institute report). This data reflects medical inflation and higher indemnity in the state.

A more comprehensive take on the calculations with different types of injury profiles is detailed below:

• Minor injury cases involving only urgent care, no visible scarring, and limited wage loss are often settled below six figures and at the lower end of SC bands when policy limits are modest.
• Moderate injury cases with visible scarring, a defined treatment path, and short‑term wage loss are commonly within $60,000–$225,000 when liability is clean.
• Serious injury cases with facial disfigurement, nerve injury, infection, and plastic‑surgery consults frequently get settled at six figures with sufficient limits and low plaintiff fault.

The Settlment Figures at a Glance

Now, let’s look into how the calculation works:

The Calculation behind Settlements

The formula for the final dog bite settlement, as per the calculator logic, is:

Net recovery = Proven compensatory damages × (1 − plaintiff fault).

It may be noted that there is a threshold with respect to the compensatory damage at 51%. A claimant at 50% fault can still recover 50% of compensatory damages. However, at 51% fault recovery is barred, as per South Carolina comparative negligence practice explanations, 2025. This can be explained like this: If gross damages are $120,000 and fault is 20%, the net lawful recovery is $96,000, subject to policy limits. However, at 51% fault, the net is $0.

Standards and methodologies that influence valuation

• ICD‑10‑CM (FY2025): As per ICD‑10‑CM Guidelines FY25, diagnostic and external‑cause coding, including W54.0XXA (“Bitten by dog, initial encounter”), supports accurate billing and causation clarity for desk reviews and litigation.
• CPT coding: As per CPT usage in medical billing practice, procedure coding frames economic damages—laceration repair, debridement, anesthesia, and staged reconstructions—often audited by insurers in SC claim valuations.
• AMA Guides to the Evaluation of Permanent Impairment (Sixth Edition, 2024 update): A recognized framework some experts use to quantify impairment and explain permanence to fact finders when function or scarring drives value (As per AMA Guides Sixth, 2024).
• Dunbar Bite Scale: Behavioral severity scale from Level 1 (pre‑bite, no skin contact) to Level 6 (fatal), used as shorthand severity in demand packages and adjuster notes.
• Rule 702/Daubert reliability: Expert opinions on plastic surgery, psychology, or vocational impact must meet reliability standards, which control whether high‑stakes opinions reach the jury in South Carolina courts.

Step‑by‑step South Carolina Settlement workflow

The dog-bite settlement in South Carolina follows these 6 steps:

1. Confirm statutory coverage: Document that the attack occurred in a public place or while the person was lawfully on private property; record whether the dog “bit” or “otherwise attacked” to capture knock‑downs and non‑bite trauma (As per S.C. Code § 47‑3‑110).
2. Preserve evidence: ER notes, operative reports, CPT/ICD‑10 summaries, photographs over time for scar maturation, therapist notes for anxiety/PTSD, and employer statements for wage loss.
3. Map fault risk: Secure witness statements and animal‑control records to address provocation narratives; small shifts near 51% can flip the outcome.
4. Identify coverage and limits: Verify homeowners/renters liability limits and med pay; align demands with insurability, not theory.
5. Model value: Run net‑recovery scenarios at 0%, 20%, and 50% fault using the simple reduction formula; compare to policy limits and venue norms.
6. Time the demand: Work backwards from the three‑year personal‑injury statute of limitations to schedule specialist consults, mediation windows, and suit filing if needed (As per South Carolina PI limitations practice).

Even when the process seems to be straightforward, there are common pitfalls a victim can face.

Troubleshooting and common challenges

• Near‑threshold provocation: Counter with contemporaneous statements, photos, and location proofs showing lawful presence. Ask early for body‑cam or dispatch logs if law‑enforcement witnesses exist.
• Underdocumenting non‑economic loss: Add plastic‑surgery opinions, staged photo sets, and psychotherapy notes to support disfigurement and psychological sequelae.
• Policy‑limit ceilings: Confirm limits early to avoid chasing value above the available coverage; consider excess avenues only where facts justify.
• Causation friction: Use ICD‑10 external‑cause coding and clean treatment timelines to close gaps insurers exploit.
• Soft‑issue skepticism: Tie complaints to objective findings, infection risks, and function; connect symptoms to ADLs and work tasks.

Cost–benefit analysis: Settle now or Litigate?

There are cases when the victims get a settlement amount that is fairly less than the expected amount. Victims tend to have doubts about whether to go for a settlement or a suit.

• When to settle: Modest policy limits, moderate injuries, strong documentation, and minimal fault risk favor a demand‑and‑negotiate track. Faster payment and lower friction often beat an uncertain upside.
• When to press litigation: High‑visibility facial scarring, credible future care, strong witnesses, and generous limits can justify filing. Expert development (plastic surgery, psychology, vocational) becomes ROI positive.
• Hidden costs: Defense spend, expert fees, and the time value of money matter. Pre‑suit mediation can compress timelines without capping upside.

It may be noted that South Carolina lacks a dog‑bite‑specific arbitration cap. So, plaintiffs preserve full value potential compared to capped arbitral schemes in other states.

• Awareness: Strict liability applies, and the 51% bar controls recovery; typical outcomes are range‑based, not single figures.
• Consideration: Align injury facts with severity tiers; check limits; run net‑recovery math at plausible fault percentages.
• Decision: Choose a path—pre‑suit resolution with a robust demand or litigation with expert development—based on expected net, limit capacity, and venue behavior.