Domonique Hayes, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Muddy Paws Rescue, Rachael Ziering, Mallory Kerley, Jenna Bonarrigo, Defendants-Respondents. (2026)

Supreme Court, Appellate Term, New York,

Domonique Hayes, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Muddy Paws Rescue, Rachael Ziering, Mallory Kerley, Jenna Bonarrigo, Defendants-Respondents.

570603 /26

Decided: September 28, 2026

PRESENT: James, P.J., Brigantti, Alpert, JJ.

Per Curiam.

Order (Jose A. Padilla, Jr., J.), entered October 31, 2025, affirmed, without costs.

The court properly awarded summary judgment dismissing plaintiff's claim for replevin of a dog. Pursuant to the prior written agreement signed by plaintiff, whereby she "transfer[red] ownership" of the subject dog to Animal Care Centers of NYC, plaintiff no longer had any ownership interest in the dog upon which to base her replevin claim (see Ciccone v Gotta Have It! Collectibles, Inc., 173 AD3d 415, 415-416 [2019]; Maxam v Kucharczyk, 138 AD3d 1268, 1268-1269 [2016]).

Plaintiff's cross-motion for sanctions was properly denied as the conduct complained of was not frivolous within the meaning of 22 NYCRR 130.1—1.

Plaintiff's remaining contentions are unpreserved for review and, in any event, without merit.

All concur.

THIS CONSTITUTES THE DECISION AND ORDER OF THE COURT.

Clerk of the Court

Decision Date: September 28, 2026

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Out of date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