Afridonidze v. Fox Communications of N. Y. Inc.

253 A.D.2d 833, 678 N.Y.S.2d 499, 1998 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 9839

This text of 253 A.D.2d 833 (Afridonidze v. Fox Communications of N. Y. Inc.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Afridonidze v. Fox Communications of N. Y. Inc., 253 A.D.2d 833, 678 N.Y.S.2d 499, 1998 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 9839 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1998).

Opinion

In an ac[834]*834tion to recover damages for personal injuries, the defendants appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Thomas, J.), dated January 29, 1998, which denied their motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint.

Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs.

We agree with the Supreme Court that triable issues of fact exist as to whether the dog which bit the plaintiff had a vicious propensity and whether the defendants had knowledge of such a propensity (see, Althoff v Lefebvre, 240 AD2d 604). Mangano, P. J., Miller, Pizzuto and Krausman, JJ., concur.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Althoff v. Lefebvre
240 A.D.2d 604 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1997)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
253 A.D.2d 833, 678 N.Y.S.2d 499, 1998 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 9839, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/afridonidze-v-fox-communications-of-n-y-inc-nyappdiv-1998.