In a prior article, I summarized some of the more interesting appellate personal injury cases of 2020 and 2021. The discussion continues in this second installment.

When Animals Attack

In Collier v. Zambito, 1 N.Y.3d 444 (2004), the New York Court of Appeals reiterated the long-standing rule that an owner of a dog (or other domestic animal) is liable for injuries caused by the animal only when the owner had or should have had knowledge of its vicious propensities. The "vicious propensity" rule favors defendants, creating a higher barrier for recovery than ordinary negligence standards.

The Court of Appeals has steadfastly adhered to the vicious propensity rule, rejecting various attempts to obtain recovery based on principles of common law negligence. See Bard v. Jahnke, 6 N.Y.3d 592 (2006) (owner of bull, a domestic animal, could be liable for attack only based on vicious propensity, and not on a theory of common law negligence).