Legal Opinion · Dissent

Pollard v. United Parcel Service

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

Decided February 7, 2003Published

1DissentHayes, J.

I respectfully dissent and vote to affirm. In my view, Andrew Dukes and Lisa Stowe (defendants) met their initial burden on their cross motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint against them by establishing that they had no prior knowledge of their dog’s vicious propensities, and plaintiff failed to raise a triable issue of fact (see Greiner v Beck, 284 AD2d 966). Defendants testified at their depositions that their dog would run toward only those pedestrians who were walking a dog, and plaintiff in this case was not walking a dog. In any event, the mere fact that defendants’ dog…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Anderson v. CardunerAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2001
  2. Fontanas v. WilsonAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2002
  3. Marquardt v. MilewskiAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2001
  4. Greiner v. BeckAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2001

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API