McGill v. McGill

Order unanimously reversed on the law without costs and motion granted. Memorandum: Defendant parent contends that it was error for Special Term to deny his motion for summary judgment because the infant plaintiiFs complaint alleged only negligent supervision (see, Holodook v Spencer, 36 NY2d 35). We agree. The infant plaintiff was injured when his father left him alone in codefendants’ living room. While unsupervised, the child was attacked and bitten by codefen 997 dants’ dog, sustaining serious facial lacerations. Because the crux of the parent’s culpability was negligent supervision, his motion for summary judgment must be granted (see, Wilson v Sears, Roebuck & Co., 126 AD2d 954; Zikely v Zikely, 98 AD2d 815, affd 62 NY2d 907). (Appeal from order of Supreme Court, Genesee County, Doyle, J. — summary judgment.) Present — Dillon, P. J., Callahan, Denman, Pine and Lawton, JJ.