Thanks for visiting! Welcome to a new way to research case law. You are viewing a free summary from Descrybe.ai. For citation and good law / bad law checking, legal issue analysis, and other advanced tools, explore our Legal Research Toolkit — not free, but close.
Gammon v. Curley
Citations: 2017 NY Slip Op 630; 147 A.D.3d 727; 46 N.Y.S.3d 183Docket: 2016-00517
Court: Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York; January 31, 2017; New York; State Appellate Court
Original Court Document: View Document
In Gammon v. Curley, the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York upheld a lower court's decision granting summary judgment in favor of the defendants, Edward Curley and others, dismissing the plaintiffs' personal injury complaint. The plaintiff, Kathleen Gammon, alleged she was knocked down by the defendants' dog while walking in their backyard. She claimed the dog jumped up, causing her to fall. The court noted that under New York law, a negligence claim for injuries caused by a domestic animal is not recognized. To succeed in a strict liability claim, a plaintiff must demonstrate that the dog had vicious propensities and that the owner was aware or should have been aware of these tendencies. The defendants provided evidence showing their dog had no history of aggression or jumping on non-family members, establishing their entitlement to judgment. The plaintiffs' argument that the dog was trained to jump on command was insufficient to create a factual dispute, as the dog only acted this way with immediate family and not in the manner described by the plaintiff. Consequently, the court affirmed the lower court's ruling, concluding that the plaintiffs failed to raise a triable issue of fact regarding the dog's behavior.