You are here: / / Landlord With Notice of a Tenant’s Dog’s Vicious Propensities...
,

Landlord With Notice of a Tenant’s Dog’s Vicious Propensities May Be Liable to the Injured Plaintiff

In finding that there were questions of fact precluding summary judgment in a dog-bite case, the Third Department noted that a landlord with notice of a dog’s vicious propensities can be liable to the injured plaintiff:

“A landlord may be liable for the attack by a dog kept by a tenant if the landlord has actual or constructive knowledge of the animal’s vicious propensities and maintains sufficient control over the premises to require the animal to be removed or confined” … . Defendant was empowered to require the [tenants] to remove the animal and, indeed, its site manager testified that he took steps to do so once he learned of the dog’s existence in September 2012. Rodgers v Horizons At Monticello, LLP, 2015 NY Slip Op 06189, 3rd Dept 7-16-15

 

You might also like
Negligence and Fraudulent Misrepresentation Causes of Action Can Not Be Based on Allegations of Breach of Contract 
ALTHOUGH THE SEXUAL ABUSE COUNT WAS FACIALLY VALID, THE VICTIM’S TESTIMONY RENDERED THE COUNT DUPLICITIOUS, REQUIRING REVERSAL ON THAT COUNT (THIRD DEPT).
ALTHOUGH THE RESPONDENT-SEX-OFFENDER WAS PROPERLY ALLOWED TO REPRESENT HIMSELF IN THE CIVIL COMMITMENT PROCEEDING, HE SHOULD NOT BE ALLOWED TO CROSS-EXAMINE THE WITNESSES WHO WERE VICTIMS OF HIS SEX OFFENSES (THIRD DEPT).
PUBLIC DEFENDER’S OFFICE REPRESENTED DEFENDANT AND THE CONFIDENTIAL INFORMANT, CONVICTION REVERSED (THIRD DEPT).
PETITIONER-INMATE PREVAILED IN THE PROCEEDING TO ANNUL THE PENALTY OF CONFINEMENT FOR 120 DAYS IN A SPECIAL HOUSING UNIT (SHU); PETITIONER WAS ENTITLED THE AWARD OF COUNSEL FEES (THIRD DEPT). ​
HEARING OFFICER SHOULD HAVE INQUIRED FURTHER INTO INMATE’S REFUSAL TO TESTIFY IN PETITIONER’S HEARING, NEW HEARING ORDERED.
Snow Removal Contractor May Be Liable to Plaintiff in Slip and Fall Action/Question of Fact Whether Failure to Use Low-Temperature Salt Created a Dangerous Condition
THE RECORD DOES NOT DEMONSTRATE THE HEARING OFFICER MADE REASONABLE EFFORTS TO SECURE THE TESTIMONY OF AN EYEWITNESS TO THE FIGHT WHICH RESULTED IN THE MISBEHAVIOR REPORT CHARGING THE PETITIONER; NEW HEARING ORDERED (THIRD DEPT).

Categories

Sign Up for the Mailing List to Be Notified When the Site Is Updated.

  • This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.

Copyright © 2026 New York Appellate Digest, Inc.
Site by CurlyHost | Privacy Policy

Concurrent Inclusory Counts Dismissed and Sentences Vacated—Defense Counsel’s... Ruling that Subject Child Could Not Visit Father in the Presence of Father’s...