From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

People v. Butler

Appellate Term of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Mar 4, 2004
2004 N.Y. Slip Op. 50476 (N.Y. App. Term 2004)

Opinion

2002-1433 SC.

Decided March 4, 2004.

Appeal by defendants from orders of the District Court, Suffolk County (P. Hensley, J), dated September 26, 2002, which, after a hearing, declared defendants' dogs to be dangerous and ordered the destruction of the male dog and the confinement of the female dog.

Order directing the destruction of the male dog dated September 26, 2002, unanimously affirmed without costs.

Order directing confinement of the female dog dated September 26, 2002, unanimously reversed without costs and proceeding dismissed as to said dog.

PRESENT: McCABE, P.J., LIFSON and SKELOS, JJ.


The lower court's finding that the male dog was dangerous was supported by a fair preponderance of the credible evidence and its determination with respect to said dog should not be disturbed on appeal ( see People v. Horvath, 205 AD2d 927). However, the finding by the lower court that the female dog was dangerous (Agriculture and Markets Law § 121) was not supported by the record. The evidence failed to establish that the female dog attacked the victim. Inasmuch as the order directing confinement of the female dog was not warranted, said order is reversed and the proceeding dismissed as to said dog.


Summaries of

People v. Butler

Appellate Term of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Mar 4, 2004
2004 N.Y. Slip Op. 50476 (N.Y. App. Term 2004)
Case details for

People v. Butler

Case Details

Full title:THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, Respondent, v. BRIAN BUTLER and…

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

Date published: Mar 4, 2004

Citations

2004 N.Y. Slip Op. 50476 (N.Y. App. Term 2004)

Citing Cases

Motta v. Menendez

The dangerous dog statute in effect on December 13, 2003 did not provide that one dog attacking another was…