Westover v. Westover

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Westover v. Westover

205 A.D.2d 828, 615 N.Y.S.2d 298, 1994 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5839

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

DecidedJune 2, 1994

StatusPublished

This text of 205 A.D.2d 828 (Westover v. Westover) 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

Westover v. Westover, 205 A.D.2d 828, 615 N.Y.S.2d 298, 1994 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5839 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1994).

Pincite

Opinion

Appeal from an order of the Supreme Court (Rose, J.), entered January 8, 1993 in Tioga County, which granted a motion by defendant James K. Westover, Sr. for summary judgment dismissing the complaint against him.

The record reveals that defendant James K. Westover, Sr. had no knowledge of any dangerous propensities of defendant Barbara E. Lane nor the need to control Lane while she was at his home. In addition, and as plaintiff readily acknowledged, Lane’s actions were so sudden and spontaneous that Westover did not have the opportunity to prevent her assault on plaintiff. Under the circumstances, there is no basis for liability against Westover and his motion for summary judgment was therefore properly granted.

Cardona, P. J., Mikoll, White, Weiss and Peters, JJ., concur. Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs.

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

Appeal from an order of the Supreme Court (Rose, J.), entered January 8, 1993 in Tioga County, which granted a motion by defendant James K. Westover, Sr. for summary judgment dismissing the complaint against him.

The record reveals that defendant James K. Westover, Sr. had no knowledge of any dangerous propensities of defendant Barbara E. Lane nor the need to control Lane while she was at his home. In addition, and as plaintiff readily acknowledged, Lane’s actions were so sudden and spontaneous that Westover did not have the opportunity to prevent her assault on plaintiff. Under the circumstances, there is no basis for liability against Westover and his motion for summary judgment was therefore properly granted.

Cardona, P. J., Mikoll, White, Weiss and Peters, JJ., concur. Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

205 A.D.2d 828, 615 N.Y.S.2d 298, 1994 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5839, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/westover-v-westover-nyappdiv-1994.