adjusterjack gave a good response and, if you read through this, you'll find that I largely concur with his assessment.
So it's not the neighbor's dog? How is it present frequently enough that it "gets out pretty much when he wants" if it doesn't actually live at the house?
You should anticipate that the insurance company (or companies) is going to take the position that your daughter's manner in her approach to the dog was provocative, as was what I expect they'll allege to be her entry into the yard where the dog was present. Note that Civil Code section 3342(a) provides,Quoting andresrr
You should anticipate that the dog owner's insurance company will try to argue that your daughter crossed into somebody's yard without permission, and thus was not lawfully on the property where the bite occurred. Keep in mind that insurance companies are in the business of denying claims and, when that's not possible, resolving them for the least amount of money -- they're not your friend. For claims against the other parties, as they are not owners the strict liability provision of Sec. 3342 does not apply to them, although negligence theories can be applied.Quoting Civil Code Sec. 3342(a)
As an aside: child who loves dogs needs to be taught the first rule of dog safety: Never approach a dog -- particularly a strange dog -- without the permission of its owner. Your daughter seems to have learned that lesson the hard way. So did my sister, many years ago, but she was fortunate in that she escaped with a single puncture wound above her lip -- had the dog not released she would have suffered a terrible, tearing injury to her face.
So the dog was contained in a fenced yard, but escaped confinement. In your estimation, is the neighbor's fencing of the sort that would be reasonably anticipated to contain a dog? If you know, did the dog jump the fence? Tunnel under it? Squeeze through the fence in a damaged area?Quoting andresrr
You say "my attorney", which makes it sound like you have a good relationship with a lawyer. If so, you should discuss your daughter's case with your lawyer. Although exceptions can arise, you should not anticipate that the insurance company (or companies) is simply going to write you a check, and you should anticipate that any settlement offer you do receive is going to be a lowball offer.Quoting andresrr
You can make a claim with all three insurance companies. (That doesn't mean you'll get a triple recovery, but you can let them address issues of liability between themselves.) You have to be very careful when negotiating with multiple insurance companies, as settling with one can significantly impair your ability to negotiate with the others (who will likely argue that you were fully compensated and that the party that settled was the responsible party) and you may inadvertently release the other possible defendants by virtue of the release form you execute.Quoting andresrr
I think the case against the absent homeowner would be a tough one to make, as even if she concurred with the owner's decision to keep the dog in the neighbor's yard, that was ultimately the owner's decision to make, the dog bite did not follow the dog's escape from her property, and she was absent from the home during the entire period of time from when the dog escaped to when the bite occurred.
You will need to investigate whether your health insurance company has a subrogation claim against the recovery -- meaning that they would have a contractual right to be repaid from any money your daughter receives -- and you also need to consider future medical costs.Quoting andresrr
Many scars, particularly those for lacerations not repaired by a cosmetic surgeon, benefit from a subsequent scar reduction surgery. Sometimes complications arise during recovery (e.g., keloids). Some scars when well repaired, due to location or skilled surgery, are barely noticeable (see, e.g., Harrison Ford's scar, which is about 1.5 inches, or Tina Fey's scar, which is much longer.) Most people with facial scarring are not that lucky and, although I suspect that you would have mentioned nerve damage if it were an issue, even without nerve damage scar tissue can affect facial movement and expression.
That could be relevant to non-statutory theories of liability but, for the sake of completeness of information, I want to note that the dog bite statute's conception of trespasser includes any person of any age who is on somebody else's property without permission.

