Today I am going to blog about a brand-new decision by New York’s Court of Appeals (highest Court in the State) which changes New York law in favor of dog-bite victims in a big way.
First, a little history of the old rule in New York. New York’s dog bite law has always been a bit of a good-news/bad-news thing.
The good news was that if you were bit by a dog whose owner “knew of should have known” of the dog’s “vicious propensities” (usually because the dog had already bitten someone else), “strict liability” applied against the dog owner. “Strict liability” meant that you didn’t have to prove the dog owner was negligent. For example, if a dog escaped from a dog owner’s yard though no fault of the dog owner (for example, a meddling neighbor cut the fence), and the dog then bit someone, the dog owner was liable. It didn’t matter whether the owner was “negligent” or not. By choosing to continue his ownership of the dog despite the dog’s known vicious propensities, the dog owner was, as a matter of law, liable for the dog’s future attacks on humans, no matter the circumstances.