Legal Opinion · Dissent

Wolfgang Doerr v. Daniel Goldsmith / Cheryl Dobinski v. George O. Lockhart

New York Court of Appeals

Decided June 9, 2015No. 17 / No. 66Published

1DissentFahey, J.

(dissenting) In 2006, in Bard v Jahnke (6 NY3d 592 [2006]), this Court revised tort law in New York by holding that injuries caused by a domestic animal are not actionable on a negligence theory. I believe that Bard was wrongly decided and I would overrule it. In departing from a recent precedent it is important to answer the question: why change? Bard conflicts with prior, more coherent and sound doctrine. It invites many questions, and has provoked a demand for the creation of ad hoc exceptions, making a compelling justification for overruling it. I would take that step now and declare that…

2Cases cited68 opinions

  1. Payne v. TennesseeSupreme Court of the United States · 1991
  2. Helvering v. HallockSupreme Court of the United States · 1940
  3. Burnet v. Coronado Oil & Gas Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1932
  4. People v. HobsonNew York Court of Appeals · 1976
  5. People v. PequeNew York Court of Appeals · 2013

63 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API