[TENTATIVE] ORDER GRANTING MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT
Defendant Mary Smith’s Motion for Summary Judgment is GRANTED.
On April 29, 2016, Plaintiff Gail Thomas filed the instant action against Defendants Mary Smith and Lawrence Smith for General Negligence and Premises Liability. The Complaint alleges that “Plaintiff was attacked and bitten by defendant’s dog while at the residence. Defendant failed to keep dogs restrained and resulted in injury to Plaintiff.”
Defendant Mary Smith now moves for summary judgment or, in the alternative, summary adjudication on the basis that she did not own the dog but, rather, was merely the landlord who had no knowledge of the dog’s dangerous propensities.
Summary judgment involves a three step process: (1) identify the issues as framed by the pleadings; (2) determine whether the moving party has established facts negating the opposing party’s claims and justifying judgment in the movant’s favor; and (3) determine whether the opposition demonstrates
Hearing Date
August 10, 2017
Type
Premises Liablty (e.g. slip & fall (General Jurisdiction)
For full print and download access, please subscribe at https://www.trellis.law/.
[TENTATIVE] ORDER GRANTING MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT
Defendant Mary Smith’s Motion for Summary Judgment is GRANTED.
On April 29, 2016, Plaintiff Gail Thomas filed the instant action against Defendants Mary Smith and Lawrence Smith for General Negligence and Premises Liability. The Complaint alleges that “Plaintiff was attacked and bitten by defendant’s dog while at the residence. Defendant failed to keep dogs restrained and resulted in injury to Plaintiff.”
Defendant Mary Smith now moves for summary judgment or, in the alternative, summary adjudication on the basis that she did not own the dog but, rather, was merely the landlord who had no knowledge of the dog’s dangerous propensities.
Summary judgment involves a three step process: (1) identify the issues as framed by the pleadings; (2) determine whether the moving party has established facts negating the opposing party’s claims and justifying judgment in the movant’s favor; and (3) determine whether the opposition demonstrates