New York Dog-Bite Law After
Flanders v. Goodfellow (2025)

In April 2025 the New York Court of Appeals decided Flanders v. Goodfellow, 2025 NY Slip Op 02261. The decision ended the 19-year rule from Bard v. Jahnke (2006) that had barred negligence claims against dog owners absent proof of vicious propensities. Under the new dual-track framework, a New York dog-bite plaintiff can sue under (1) *strict liability (where the owner knew or should have known the dog had vicious tendencies) AND (2) ordinary negligence* (where the owner failed to exercise reasonable care to prevent harm) — regardless of whether the dog had any prior bite history. The negligence track unlocks full tort damages including pain and suffering, scarring, and lost wages — categories that were unavailable under the old strict-liability-only framework.

Bard v. Jahnke, 6 N.Y.3d 592 (2006), was a New York Court of Appeals decision that barred plaintiffs from suing dog owners in negligence. Under Bard, a victim could only proceed under strict liability — meaning they had to prove the owner knew or should have known the dog had specific 'vicious propensities.' Without documented prior aggression, the case ended at summary judgment. Bard made New York one of the harshest jurisdictions in the country for dog-bite victims, because the typical first-bite case had no documented prior aggression. Flanders v. Goodfellow overruled Bard on April 17, 2025, restoring ordinary negligence as a viable theory and aligning New York with the Restatement (Second) of Torts and the law of most other states.

Yes — with one caveat. Common-law decisions like Flanders generally apply to all pending and future cases, including those involving pre-decision incidents, *so long as the statute of limitations has not expired. New York's personal-injury SOL is 3 years from the date of injury (CPLR §214(5)). So a Nassau or Suffolk County resident who was bitten in 2022, 2023, or 2024 — and who is still within the 3-year window — can plead negligence under Flanders in a complaint filed today. Incidents older than 3 years from filing are time-barred regardless of Flanders*.

Yes — and you should plead both. Strict liability and negligence are independent theories that often work in tandem. Strict liability covers situations where the owner had notice of vicious propensities (prior bite, aggressive history, complaints to authorities). Negligence covers situations where the owner failed to act reasonably (off-leash in violation of local ordinance, unsecured property, dog not crated when delivery workers expected). A plaintiff can win on either or both. Most experienced personal-injury attorneys in Long Island and NYC now plead both theories in every complaint.

Under the negligence track unlocked by Flanders, the damages spectrum is the same as any other personal-injury case in New York: (1) medical expenses, past and future; (2) lost wages, past and future; (3) pain and suffering; (4) scarring and disfigurement; (5) emotional distress and PTSD; (6) loss of enjoyment of life; (7) where the owner's conduct was particularly reckless, possible punitive damages. Severe dog-bite injuries — multiple surgeries, permanent scarring, nerve damage, infection complications — routinely produce six-figure recoveries; catastrophic cases involving children or facial injuries can produce seven-figure verdicts.

Three years from the date of injury under CPLR §214(5) — for both strict-liability and negligence theories. Exceptions: (1) if the dog is owned by a municipal entity (police K-9 unit, animal-control dog), a Notice of Claim must be filed within 90 days of the incident under General Municipal Law §50-e; (2) if the victim was a minor, the SOL is tolled until age 18 (CPLR §208); (3) workers' compensation claims by injured delivery workers have separate deadlines, generally requiring written notice within 30 days. Always consult an attorney as soon after the incident as possible — early consultation preserves both your claim and your evidence.

In most cases yes. Standard New York homeowner's policies and renter's policies include a personal-liability provision that covers dog-bite injuries up to policy limits (commonly $100,000 to $500,000, with umbrella policies providing additional layers). However: many carriers exclude specific breeds — Pit Bull, Rottweiler, German Shepherd, Doberman, Akita, Chow Chow, Husky, and others. Read the homeowner's policy declarations carefully. A breed exclusion can defeat coverage entirely. Where a policy is denied based on a breed exclusion, the denial itself is sometimes admissible in the underlying tort case as evidence of the owner's notice of risk.

Almost certainly yes — and Flanders itself was a postal-carrier case. The plaintiff in Flanders was Rebecca Flanders, a USPS letter carrier bitten while delivering a package on the Goodfellows' porch. The Court of Appeals' opinion specifically considered the position of delivery workers approaching residences where dogs are present. Delivery workers typically pursue a dual claim: (1) negligence against the homeowner under Flanders, and (2) workers' compensation against their employer (USPS, UPS, FedEx, Amazon Logistics, etc.). The two claims interact — workers' comp coverage may be reimbursed from the tort recovery — so it's important to have counsel managing both tracks from the start.

They matter enormously. Every town and village on Long Island — Hempstead, Brookhaven, Smithtown, Huntington, Babylon, Islip, North Hempstead, Oyster Bay, Riverhead, Southampton, East Hampton, Southold, and Shelter Island — has a leash ordinance requiring dogs to be on leash or properly restrained in public spaces. Violation of a local leash ordinance is treated as evidence of negligence (and in some courts as negligence per se) in a Flanders negligence claim. If the dog that bit you was off-leash in violation of local law at the time of the bite, that fact alone often satisfies the negligence-per-se element of the case. The same is true in all five NYC boroughs under NYC Health Code §161.05.

Generally yes. New York property owners owe visitors a duty of reasonable care, which includes warning of or restraining known-dangerous animals. The duty is highest for invitees (delivery workers, contractors, social guests by invitation) and somewhat lower for licensees and trespassers — but even trespassers can recover where the owner's conduct was particularly reckless (e.g., training the dog to attack). The exception: provocation. If you intentionally physically provoked the dog (hit it, kicked it, threatened it), the case may be defeated; mere proximity to the dog is not provocation.

Highly fact-specific. Variables include: severity of injury (multiple surgeries vs. single emergency-department visit), scarring and permanent disfigurement (particularly facial), lost work time, emotional/psychological impact (PTSD diagnoses are common after attacks on children and delivery workers), liability clarity (one bite vs. multiple bites, witnessed vs. disputed), and available insurance coverage. Use our interactive settlement calculator for a preliminary estimate. Severe-injury cases on Long Island and NYC routinely settle in the $75,000–$500,000+ range under the Flanders framework; catastrophic cases involving children, facial injuries, or recurrent attacks have produced seven-figure recoveries.

Long Island has a uniquely high concentration of factors that produce dog-bite cases: (1) suburban density with many single-family homes and outdoor dogs; (2) heavy daily delivery traffic from USPS, UPS, FedEx, Amazon, and food-delivery services; (3) active outdoor lifestyle bringing residents and visitors into contact with off-leash dogs at parks, beaches, and trails; (4) two large counties (Nassau and Suffolk) with overlapping but distinct leash ordinances; (5) proximity to the NYC boroughs (Queens and Brooklyn) creates frequent cross-border incidents. The Law Office of Jason Tenenbaum, P.C. has represented dog-bite victims in cases litigated in Nassau County Supreme Court (Mineola), Suffolk County Supreme Court (Riverhead), and all five NYC borough courts.