One evening, Andrea Filer and her daughter were riding their horses along Riley Hill Road, a public highway in the Town of Salem, New York. At the same time, Megan Adams was jogging along the same road with her son in a stroller and two dogs by her side. Filer noticed that her horse’s ears flickered and stiffened, apparently hearing sounds from behind. Filer turned and saw Adams. When Adams observed that Filer was having difficulty controlling her horse, she slowed to a walk. While Adams was still about 50 yards behind the riders, one of her dogs barked and the horses both abruptly broke into a canter or a run. Filer, who was not wearing a helmet, fell from her horse seconds later and sustained serious injuries. Plaintiff Filer sued Adams, alleging that Adams was negligent in following the horse riders too closely and letting her dogs bark, which she claimed spooked the horses. ­Defendant Adams asserted that Filer, an experienced rider, should have had control of her horse. Adams stated that she was a far enough distance from Filer and that walking with the stroller and the dog’s bark were not the proximate cause of Filer’s accident. Were Adams’s activities the proximate cause of Filer’s riding accident? Andrea v. Adams, 966 N. Y. S. 2d 553, 106 A. D. 3d 1417, 2013 N. Y. App. Div. Lexis 3831 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2013)