From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Cameron v. Harari

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Jun 27, 2005
19 A.D.3d 631 (N.Y. App. Div. 2005)

Opinion

2004-04696.

June 27, 2005.

In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, etc., the plaintiffs appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Jackson, J.), dated April 20, 2004, which granted the defendant's motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint.

Phillip E. Sloan, New York, N.Y., for appellants.

Gilroy Downes Horowitz Goldstein, New York, N.Y. (Michael M. Horowitz of counsel), for respondent.

Before: Schmidt, J.P., S. Miller, Krausman and Fisher, JJ., concur.


Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs.

The plaintiff Donna Cameron (hereinafter the plaintiff) allegedly was injured when the hip of the defendant's dog came into contact with the back of her left ankle, causing her to fall. The accident occurred in Prospect Park, while the plaintiff's dog and the defendant's dog, both unleashed, were playing.

The defendant established her prima facie entitlement to judgment as a matter of law by establishing that she neither knew nor should have known that her dog had any propensity to run into people, and the plaintiffs, in opposition, failed to raise a triable issue of fact ( see Althoff v. Lefebvre, 240 AD2d 604; cf. Collier v. Zambito, 1 NY3d 444, 447; compare with Anderson v. Carduner, 279 AD2d 369). "Contrary to the plaintiff's contention, liability cannot be premised solely on the fact that the defendant left the dog unrestrained" ( Althoff v. Lefebvre, supra at 604; cf. Young v. Wyman, 159 AD2d 792, 793-794, affd 76 NY2d 1009).

The plaintiffs' remaining contentions are without merit.


Summaries of

Cameron v. Harari

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Jun 27, 2005
19 A.D.3d 631 (N.Y. App. Div. 2005)
Case details for

Cameron v. Harari

Case Details

Full title:DONNA CAMERON et al., Appellants, v. MARILYN HARARI, Respondent

Court:Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department

Date published: Jun 27, 2005

Citations

19 A.D.3d 631 (N.Y. App. Div. 2005)
797 N.Y.S.2d 295

Citing Cases

Zelman v. Cosentino

The plaintiffs' reliance on the dog's one previous escape was insufficient to raise a triable issue of fact,…

Smith v. Linden Brewery, Inc.

The Butler Court granted the defendant's motion for summary judgment because there was no evidence that the…