Understanding New York’s Dog Bite Law

Understanding New York’s Dog Bite Law

New York’s dog bite law is somewhat complicated since it involves elements of strict liability and a “one free bite” rule for dogs that have not previously bitten anyone or exhibited “vicious propensities.” It isn’t immediately obvious what “vicious propensities” involve — is it growling at people? Barking at strangers? Chasing and killing squirrels? In general, a vicious propensity involves exhibiting behavior that is recognizable as threatening or dangerous to people. While all dogs are territorial and likely to bark at strangers, dogs that have bitten someone, snarl, bare their teeth, snatch at people through a fence, or attack and mangle other pets clearly exhibit signs of viciousness and ferociousness.

A Dog’s Vicious Propensity — Liability under New York’s Dog Bite Law

Under New York law, dog owners can be held strictly liable for dog bites and dog attacks by their dogs against others if they knew (or should have known) that their dog previously exhibited vicious propensities. New York courts have reaffirmed the liability of pet owners in regard to knowledge of an animal’s vicious propensities even in cases where an animal hasn’t bitten anyone in the past. In Bard v. Jahnke, 6 NY3d 592 (N.Y. 2006), New York’s highest court made it clear this foreknowledge applies in cases where a dog hasn’t attacked someone yet but has exhibited vicious behavior that an owner should have recognized as potentially dangerous to others.

Strict Liability in Dog Bite Cases

In New York, dog owners are strictly liable for injuries caused by their pets if they knew, or should have known, of the animal’s vicious propensities. While there are exceptions for police dogs and in cases where a dog bite victim antagonizes an animal, in general, dog owners are liable for a dog bite victim's medical costs, pain and suffering and other damages if a dog owner is aware — or should have been aware — that his or her dog previously displayed vicious propensities. In some cases, an owner’s restraint or confinement of a dog may be an indication of knowledge on their part of the threat posed by their dog (see Hahnke v. Friederich, 140 NY 224, 226 [1893]. In this regard, it can be inferred that people who own a dog to guard property or provide home security do so in part because of their knowledge of a dog’s vicious propensities. It’s important to note here that the presence of a “Beware of Dog” sign in a yard is not enough to automatically remove liability from a dog’s owner should their dog bite someone who enters onto the property in question.

Summary Judgment — the Dismissal of a Dog Bite Case

In order to dismiss a dog bite case, a dog’s owner will claim that there is no evidence the dog previously displayed vicious propensities. This proof may involve establishing that the dog in question hasn’t bitten anyone in the past, that the dog was unduly provoked, that the dog bite victim invaded the dog’s space or that the dog was under duress when the attack happened. Since dog owners are likely to argue it was the dog bite victim who provoked an attack, it is essential to thoroughly investigate a dog bite case, gathering testimony from neighbors and others regarding their interactions with the dog.

Contact Long Island Dog Bite Lawyers at Rosenberg & Gluck

If a dog has bitten you or your child, it’s important to contact a dog bite attorney as soon as possible. At the personal injury law office of Rosenberg & Gluck link to we understand how to document dog bite injuries and begin the process of investigating what happened in a dog bite case. To schedule a free consultation and learn how we can help you, call our office today.