New York Court Ruling Ends "One Free Bite" Rule
May 28, 2025
On April 17, 2025, the New York Court of Appeals issued a landmark ruling in Flanders v. Goodfellow, fundamentally changing how the state handles dog bite liability. In a unanimous decision, the court eliminated the long-standing, so-called “one free bite” rule, allowing victims to bring negligence claims even if the dog had no prior history of aggression. This shift marks a major change in how responsibility is assessed and has far-reaching consequences for both dog owners and injury victims.
Until now, New York followed a strict liability model requiring victims to prove that a dog had “vicious propensities” and that the owner knew, or should have known, about them. That typically meant showing a prior bite or documented aggression. Without that proof, victims were often out of luck.
In Flanders, the court ruled that victims can now pursue negligence claims regardless of the dog’s history. The case involved a postal worker bitten while delivering mail. There was conflicting evidence as to whether the dog had known aggressive behavior, but the court still found that the owner could be liable if they failed to take reasonable care, even if they did not know of the dog’s aggressive tendencies.
What This Means for Dog Owners
Dog owners now have a heightened duty of care. Even if a dog has never shown aggression, owners must take reasonable steps to prevent injuries, such as:
- Using leashes in public
- Maintaining secure fences or gates
- Warning visitors about a dog’s presence
Negligence claims can arise from lapses in these areas. This may also impact homeowners’ and renters’ insurance policies, with potential premium increases or exclusions for certain breeds.
What This Means for Victims
For victims, Flanders lowers the burden of bringing a claim. Claims can now be brought under both vicious propensity and negligence causes of action. No longer required to prove a dog’s prior viciousness, plaintiffs can focus on whether the owner acted reasonably. This brings New York in line with most other states and offers a clearer path to recovery.
However, the new standard introduces questions about what constitutes “reasonable care,” potentially leading to more fact-driven litigation.
Bottom Line
Dog owners should take a close look at their responsibilities and their insurance policies. With the door now open to negligence claims, the legal landscape has shifted dramatically.
Sarah Rera is a litigation attorney with Gross Shuman P.C. who focuses her practice in the areas of personal injury and business litigation. She has served as trial counsel in multiple complex business disputes and personal injury claims in New York State Supreme Court, receiving numerous successful verdicts for her clients. She is also an experienced appellate practitioner and has appeared before the Appellate Division and the New York Court of Appeals, the highest Court in New York. She can be reached at 716-854-4300 ext. 289 or srera@gross-shuman.com.
