SEIGER v. DERCOLE (2008)

Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Fourth Department, New York.

Jonathan SEIGER, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Vincent DERCOLE, et al., Defendants, and Max Properties, Ltd., Defendant-Respondent.

Decided: April 25, 2008

PRESENT: SCUDDER, P.J., SMITH, CENTRA, PERADOTTO, AND PINE, JJ.

Redmond & Parrinello, LLP, Rochester (Bruce F. Freeman of Counsel), for Plaintiff-Appellant. Osborn, Reed & Burke, LLP, Rochester (Jeffrey M. Wilkens of Counsel), for Defendant-Respondent.

Plaintiff commenced this action seeking damages for injuries he sustained when a dog owned by defendant Vincent Dercole attacked plaintiff and his dog as they were walking on a street one block south of the premises that Dercole leased from defendant Max Properties, Ltd. (defendant). We conclude that Supreme Court properly granted the motion of defendant seeking summary judgment dismissing the amended complaint against it. “Because the incident did not occur on defendant's property ․[,] defendant owed no duty of care to plaintiff[ ]” (Ruffin v. Dykes, 37 A.D.3d 1191, 830 N.Y.S.2d 426; see Weipert v. Oldfield, 298 A.D.2d 974, 748 N.Y.S.2d 123).

It is hereby ORDERED that the order so appealed from is unanimously affirmed without costs.

MEMORANDUM:

Was this helpful?

Why was this helpful?

Easy to understand

Solved my problem

Other

Why was this not helpful?

Missing the information I need

Too complicated / too many steps

Out of date

Other

Thank you for your feedback!

Trusted by Consumers. Recognized by AI.

As the largest network of trusted legal brands, we help firms build authority across the platforms consumers and AI systems rely on most. Our network helps attorneys strengthen visibility, credibility, and preference where legal decisions begin.

Explore the Network