Bailey v. Veitch
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
1Dissent
Hurlbutt, J.E, and Hayes, J. (dissenting in part).
We respectfully dissent in part. We agree with the majority that there are issues of fact whether Sable, the dog allegedly owned and/or harbored by defendants, caused the injuries sustained by plaintiffs daughter and whether defendant John Veitch knew or should have known that Sable had vicious propensities. We *1082cannot agree with the majority, however, that there is an issue of fact whether defendant Kathleen A. Cappon had notice of Sable’s alleged vicious propensities. We thus conclude that Supreme Court properly granted the motion of Cappon…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Tronolone v. Praxair, Inc.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2005
- Fontecchio v. EspositoAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1985
- Nidzyn v. StevensAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1989
- Arslanoglou v. DefayetteAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1984
- Schaeffer v. Upjohn Co.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1993