[Kragh]

Actually...in a civil case....the matter is decided by the preponderance of evidence...which means "what is more likely to have occurred.....in a criminal case the burden of proof is much tougher and completely different. When the jury gets the charged by the judge they are explained the difference and the common language is "51% gets you there."

Medical experts do opine based on FACTS and then they give an opinion as to proximate causation

Not trying to argue with anyone....but if the owner of the dog has insurance...they will offer a defense for the policy holder......

This story is bogus anyway....I have NEVER worked for an attorney or in any firm that needs someone to take a poll on a message board that is clearly biased.....and further it's completely unethical for the attorney to be "working with both sides" it's called a conflict of interest and Legal Malpractice!

IN many civil cases here in Texas, the court will order an "arbitration", here that arbitration is conducted by a third law firm, a neutral lawyer, who listens to both sides together, and if necessary, separates them and goes back and forth between both sides, doing just what this post describes, gives his opinion of what might happen, what that side has to lose and suggests settlement options, if the arbitration fails, they go to court...and both sides equally split the cost of that attorney...