The Wheels of Justice
Wills and Estates

To learn about our Wills and Estates practice, click the Wills & Estates icon above

Justice

To learn more about Justice, click the Scales of Justice icon above

The Legal Literacy Project

 

GoodNewsGreatJoy
Login to your Account

Entries in Alcohol (1)

Wednesday
Nov282012

Dog Bites and Parties at which alcohol is served to minors

On Nov 16, 2012, the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court (4th Dept) decided the case of  Murphy v. Cominsk. Here is what happened. The parents were out of town.  Their child, a minor, decided to host a party at which alcohol was served. The guests, also minors, became rowdy. The rowdiness at the party agitated the family dog which bit the plaintiff.

It is illegal in the State of New York to serve alcohol to a minor. New York State has a law called the Dram Shop Act found in General Obligations Law ยงยง 11-100 and 11-101 that protects minors from alcohol.

The Plaintiff argued that the defendant was liable via New York's Dram Shop Act. The Defendant argued that the Dram Shop Act did not provide plaintiff an avenue to liability. In a dog bite case, the only avenue to liability was via a dog's known, vicious propensities. The Defendants cited the case of Petrone v Fernandez, 12 NY3d 546, a Court of Appeal case - the Court of Appeals is New York State's highest court - in which the Court of Appeals expressed the opinion that liability for a dog bite only arises if the dog had known, vicious propensities, that is, the dog was defective and its owner knew about it. There is no liability for negligence in the context of a dog bite, e.g., the dog was unleashed.

The Appellate Division of the Supreme Court (4th Dept) agreed with the plaintiff and disagreed with the defendant. Because alcohol and minors were involved, liability arises from a dog bite.

The lesson from this case is that parents ought to think twice before leaving their minor children who like to party home alone.

P.S.

The Court makes an interesting comment about causation in Dram Shop cases. In a Dram Shop case, a plaintiff does not have the burden of proving "proximate causation". All a plaintiff needs to prove is "some reasonable or practical connection between the [furnishing] of alcohol and the resulting injuries".

Bosco and Mascolo, Esqs. LLP handles cases involving vicious animals including dog bites. We also handle cases in which alcohol contributes to the injuries and other losses.