Cook v. Levintan — 94 N.Y.S. 396

Majority

p. 396

COOK v. LEVINTAN.

(Supreme Court, Appellate Term.

June 26, 1905.)

Headnote

Vicious Dogs—Evidence—Sufficiency.

In an action for injuries by a vicious dog, a general statement of a dog-dealer that bitches with pups are dangerous does not establish the vicious tendency of the particular bitch, or charge defendant with notice.

Appeal from Municipal Court, Borough of Manhattan, First District.

Action by William Cook against Henry Levintan. From a judgment for plaintiff, defendant appeals.

Reversed.

Argued before SCOTT, P. J„ and DUGRO and MacLEAN, JJ..

Marcus Helfand, for appellant.

Kelley & Connelly, for respondent.

There was no satisfactory evidence that the particular dog in question was vicious, or that, if she was, the defendant knew of it. The general statement of the dog dealer that bitches with pups are dangerous does not establish the vicious tendency of this particular bitch, or charge the defendant with notice. In my opinion, the case should not have been submitted to the jury at all.

Judgment reversed, and new trial granted, with costs to appellant to abide the event. All concur.