A single court decision this spring significantly expanded exposure for New York dog owners, and many owners are unsure what this means for them and their pets.
At Raphaelson & Levine, our New York dog bite attorneys have represented injury victims across New York for over three decades. As loving dog owners ourselves, we understand how overwhelming these changes might feel when you thought you were doing everything right.
Understanding how New York’s dog bite laws have changed and practicing responsible ownership with proper training and care matters more than ever.
The recent Flanders v. Goodfellow decision means dog owners can now face lawsuits for negligence, regardless of their pet’s bite history. Even if your dog has never shown aggression, even if they’re gentle with your family, you could be liable to damages if someone gets hurt because you didn’t exercise “reasonable care” in preventing the incident.
Here’s what all New York dog owners should know about what’s changed, how it impacts your legal responsibilities, and techniques to protect your rights and your communities from avoidable risks.
What Every Dog Family Needs to Know About New York’s New Dog Bite Standard
Most New York dog owners are probably familiar with the “one bite rule.“
For nearly twenty years, a pet owner could only be held liable if someone proved you knew or should have known your dog had “vicious propensities.” In practice? That usually meant your dog had to bite someone first before any future victim could recover damages. But could also mean the dog had shown previous behaviors like growling, snapping, charging, or other acts that might endanger people.
The problems with this approach became painfully clear in the Flanders case. Rebecca Flanders, a postal worker, was attacked by a 70-pound dog while delivering a package. The facts were disturbing.
This dog had repeatedly “slammed into window glass” trying to attack postal workers, spraying saliva as it attempted to bite through the barrier. The animal was so aggressive that it regularly dragged its owner to the ground during walks.
The owners knew there was a problem. They’d even hired a dog trainer. But their response was inadequate, and they failed to address the dog’s dangerous behavior toward strangers.
Here’s what’s particularly troubling: under the old one bite rule, Flanders’ case was initially dismissed because of a lack of evidence that the owners knew or should have known about the dogs “vicious propensities.”
The fact that postal workers had been terrorized for months, that the dog showed clear signs of aggression, that bystanders were at risk; none of that mattered legally.
On Apr 17, 2025, New York’s high court overruled Bard v. Jahnke (2006), calling the rule “out of tune with the life about us” and “at variance with modern-day needs and concepts of justice.” We couldn’t agree more.
Flanders v. Goodfellow introduced negligence as a separate legal standard that operates alongside the one-bite rule. This means that dog owners can now be held liable if they fail to exercise reasonable care under the circumstances, regardless of whether their dog has bitten before.
What does “reasonable care” mean in practical terms? It’s whether you acted how a responsible person would in similar circumstances.
Did you take appropriate steps to prevent foreseeable harm? This is where your choices about training, socialization, and professional care become legally significant in ways they never were before.
What ‘Reasonable Care’ Means for Dog Owners
The legal standard for “reasonable care” isn’t complicated in theory. This legal term means you acted similar to how another person would reasonably act under similar circumstances. But when it comes to dogs? That’s where things get nuanced.
Think secure restraint and containment, warnings, avoiding high-risk contexts for reactive dogs, and getting professional guidance when needed.
Ultimately, a jury must decide whether the injury was caused by a failure to use reasonable care or from “dogs just being dogs” (ordinary animal behavior).
We know this can feel overwhelming, especially when you’ve been doing what you thought was right all along. Through decades of litigation, we’ve seen courts examine this issue from every angle, and the answer often comes down to documentation, consistency, and professional guidance.
In a case we handled recently involving a well-intentioned family with a rescued Golden Retriever mix. Beautiful dog, great with their own children, had completed a basic training program with a certified trainer.
The family thought they’d covered all their bases. But, during their child’s birthday party, the dog bit a visiting child who’d been running around the backyard and accidentally stepped on the dog’s paw.
The family argued they’d done everything right. In many ways, they’d shown genuine care for their pet. The problem wasn’t their love for their dog or their good intentions. The issue was that they’d dismissed their trainer’s recommendation for additional socialization work with children after noticing their dog seemed overwhelmed during busy family gatherings.
They’d also postponed following up on their veterinarian’s suggestion to discuss the dog’s anxiety responses with an animal behaviorist.
Courts will likely examine several key factors when evaluating whether you exercised reasonable care:
Often, reasonable care doesn’t mean perfection, but is about showing a genuine, ongoing effort to understand and meet your dog’s needs while protecting your community.
In the Flanders decision, the Court noted that the owners had worked with a trainer and that postal carriers described the dog repeatedly slamming into the front windows, snarling, and even trying to bite through the glass during deliveries.
The judges determined that these facts were enough for a jury to decide whether the owners should have recognized the risk (the traditional “vicious propensities” rule) and whether they failed to use reasonable care under the circumstances (ordinary negligence)
The lesson? Good intentions matter, but they must be paired with appropriate action and professional guidance that matches the scope of the issue.
Why Professional Training Is Your Best Insurance Policy
When we represent dog bite victims, we often see the aftermath of well-meaning but inadequate approaches.
The family who watched YouTube videos instead of hiring a certified trainer. The owner who ignored their veterinarian’s behavioral recommendations because professional help seemed expensive or unnecessary.
These cases break our hearts because they’re often preventable.
But we also see responsible dog owners whose detailed training records and professional consultations tell a completely different story. While professional care isn’t a guarantee against legal action, it creates compelling evidence of reasonable care. This evidence can make a significant difference in how courts evaluate negligence claims, but more importantly, can actively help make our neighborhoods safer for everyone.
Think about it this way: every dog that receives professional behavioral assessment is less likely to surprise a postal worker, frighten a child, or injure another pet.
Every owner who invests in ongoing training creates safer sidewalks for families, joggers, and fellow dog owners. When you work with certified professionals to address your dog’s needs proactively, you’re not just protecting yourself legally, you’re protecting your loved ones, your neighbors, and your fellow community.
It helps ensure that children can walk to school safely, that delivery workers can do their jobs without fear, and that other pet owners can enjoy public spaces with their animals.
As trial attorneys who’ve seen the devastating impact when prevention fails, we know that families can be forever changed by a single incident that might have been easily avoided with proper care and training.
But, we’ve also witnessed how responsible ownership backed by professional guidance can prevent these tragedies entirely. That’s the New York we all want to live in.
Here’s what we want you to take away from all of this: while the legal landscape has shifted, responsible dog owners like you aren’t powerless.
In fact, if you’re already investing in professional training and behavioral care, or if you’re reading this because you genuinely care about doing right by your pet, you’re likely ahead of the curve.
But knowledge without action doesn’t protect anyone.
Most importantly, remember that this isn’t just about protecting yourself legally. Every dollar you invest in professional dog care, every training session you attend, every behavioral issue you address proactively is helping to make our neighborhoods safer for everyone.
If your dog bites someone despite your best efforts, consulting with an attorney can help ensure they receive appropriate compensation while you navigate the legal process. But our genuine hope is that by understanding these new legal standards and taking responsible action, we can make those conversations and incidents increasingly rare.
By understanding these new laws and showing genuine compassion to our beloved pets through proper training, and to our neighbors through responsible ownership, we can make New York a truly safe place for every dog and every person.
