Greiner v. Beck

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Greiner v. Beck

284 A.D.2d 966, 726 N.Y.S.2d 317, 2001 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5846

CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York

DecidedJune 8, 2001

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 284 A.D.2d 966 (Greiner v. Beck) 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

Greiner v. Beck, 284 A.D.2d 966, 726 N.Y.S.2d 317, 2001 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5846 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2001).

Pincite

Opinion

—Order unanimously reversed on the law without costs, motion granted and complaint dismissed. Memorandum: Plaintiff commenced this action seeking damages for injuries sustained by her seven-year-old daughter when she was attacked by a dog owned by defendants. Supreme Court erred in denying defendants’ motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint. Defendants established their entitlement to judgment as a matter of law by submitting proof that they lacked any knowledge of the dog’s alleged vicious propensities, and plaintiff failed to raise a triable question of fact on that issue (see, Plennert v Abel, 269 AD2d 796; Perry v Mikolajczyk, 259 AD2d 987). (Appeal from Order of Supreme Court, Erie County, Cos-grove, J. — Summary Judgment.) Present — Pigott, Jr., P. J., Pine, Wisner, Kehoe and Burns, JJ.

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

—Order unanimously reversed on the law without costs, motion granted and complaint dismissed. Memorandum: Plaintiff commenced this action seeking damages for injuries sustained by her seven-year-old daughter when she was attacked by a dog owned by defendants. Supreme Court erred in denying defendants’ motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint. Defendants established their entitlement to judgment as a matter of law by submitting proof that they lacked any knowledge of the dog’s alleged vicious propensities, and plaintiff failed to raise a triable question of fact on that issue (see, Plennert v Abel, 269 AD2d 796; Perry v Mikolajczyk, 259 AD2d 987). (Appeal from Order of Supreme Court, Erie County, Cos-grove, J. — Summary Judgment.) Present — Pigott, Jr., P. J., Pine, Wisner, Kehoe and Burns, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

284 A.D.2d 966, 726 N.Y.S.2d 317, 2001 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5846, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/greiner-v-beck-nyappdiv-2001.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack