Tara Jones
A dog attack can change everything in a moment—leaving victims physically wounded, emotionally scarred, and sometimes permanently traumatized. But it’s not just the victim who faces life-altering consequences. Dog owners who fail to control their pets now face a new legal reality in New York: they can be held legally responsible even if their dog has never bitten or shown aggression before.
In a landmark April 2025 decision with Flanders v. Goodfellow, the New York Court of Appeals shattered a century-old legal standard. In doing so, it opened a wider legal path for dog bite victims to recover compensation and finally aligned New York law with basic principles of fairness and accountability.
The Broken System Before Flanders
Under the old law, victims of dog bites in New York had to meet an incredibly difficult burden. In order to sue and win, the injured party had to prove two things:
- The dog had vicious propensities—a legal term referring to a known tendency to behave dangerously, such as biting, snapping, or attacking.
- The owner knew or should have known about those propensities.
This created an unfair system. Unless the dog had previously bitten someone—or had an obvious history of aggression—the victim was often left without legal recourse, no matter how serious their injuries were.
The standard often protected careless or negligent dog owners while leaving victims without justice. It effectively amounted to a “one free bite” rule in practice—even though New York never officially adopted that doctrine.
What Is “Vicious Propensity”?
Under New York law, vicious propensity means a dog has a natural inclination to act in a way that endangers others. This could include:
- Prior biting incidents
- Repeated growling, lunging, or snapping
- Owner warnings to others about the dog’s behavior
However, behaviors like barking or pulling on a leash generally weren’t enough.
Even with this definition, proving a case often required a documented history of aggression—and that the owner had specific knowledge of it. Many deserving victims were left uncompensated because the law didn’t allow for a negligence-based claim.
The Game-Changer: Flanders v. Goodfellow
In Flanders v. Goodfellow, 2025 NY Slip Op 02261, the Court of Appeals finally addressed this imbalance.
In this case, the plaintiff, Mr. Flanders, was attacked and injured by a dog owned by Mr. Goodfellow. Rather than solely pursuing strict liability based on vicious propensities, Flanders also brought a claim for ordinary negligence—arguing that the dog owner failed to take reasonable steps to prevent foreseeable harm.
And the Court agreed.
For the first time, New York’s highest court held that a victim can sue a dog owner under traditional negligence principles—even if the dog had never bitten or acted aggressively before.
In its opinion, the Court declared:
“Where an animal causes injury, and the owner failed to exercise due care to prevent that injury, liability may be based on principles of ordinary negligence.”
Why This Is a Seismic Shift in New York Law
This ruling means that injured victims now have two legal avenues:
- Strict Liability: If the dog had vicious propensities and the owner knew or should have known about them.
- Negligence: If the owner failed to act reasonably to prevent foreseeable harm—even without any prior signs of aggression.
Or both. Plaintiffs can pursue either or both claims, depending on the facts of their case.
This change makes it significantly easier for victims to access justice—especially in cases where a dog owner was clearly careless, such as:
- Leaving a gate open
- Letting a strong dog roam off-leash
- Failing to restrain a dog during deliveries or visits
What Dog Bite Victims Need to Know
To recover compensation in a dog bite case, three core elements must still be met:
- Liability: Now easier to prove thanks to the Flanders ruling.
- Damages: There must be a documented physical injury. Mere fear isn’t enough, but medical treatment for physical and psychological injuries both count.
- A Deep Pocket: The person responsible must have insurance or financial resources. Most homeowner’s insurance policies cover dog bites, but renters may not have coverage.
A Real-World Example
The Rizzuto Law Firm recently recovered $485,000 for a delivery driver who was attacked while delivering a package to a home. The homeowner’s dog escaped and bit the client’s leg. She required rabies shots, stitches, debridement procedures, skin grafts, and was left with permanent scarring.
The firm was able to meet all three criteria:
- Liability: The gate was left open.
- Injury: Serious and well-documented.
- Deep Pocket: The homeowner’s insurance policy paid the settlement.
What Dog Owners Need to Know
If you own a dog in New York, the Flanders decision raises the bar. You are now expected to take proactive steps to prevent your dog from causing injury—even if your dog has never shown aggression before.
Reasonable precautions include:
- Keeping your dog securely enclosed on your property
- Using a leash in public
- Supervising your dog around guests, workers, and children
- Providing warnings if your dog can be unpredictable
This ruling doesn’t target responsible dog owners—it protects the public from negligent ones.
Final Thoughts: A Win for Fairness and Accountability
The Flanders v. Goodfellow decision is long overdue. It finally gives dog bite victims in New York a fair shot at justice. No longer does a person have to prove that a dog was a known menace before holding the owner accountable.
Instead, if an owner acts unreasonably and someone gets hurt, they can be sued. It’s that simple.
At The Rizzuto Law Firm, we’re proud to fight for the rights of the injured. Whether you’ve been hurt in a dog attack or want to understand your responsibilities as a dog owner, they’re here to help.
If you or a loved one has been injured by a dog, ring Rizzuto at 855-RIZZUTO for a free consultation or visit online at www.RIZZUTOLAWFIRM.com. They’ll explain your rights, evaluate your case, and fight to get you the compensation you deserve.