JUSTICE BYRNE delivered the opinion of the court:

This appeal presents an issue of first impression in Illinois: under what circumstances does alandlord owe a duty of care to his tenant's invitees to prevent injury from an attack by an animal keptby the tenant on the leased premises? On April 17, 2000, plaintiff, Alexus Klitzka, and her mothervisited the home of defendants Mark and Amanda Hellios, where Alexus was bitten in the face by thecouple's dog, Haley. Mark and Amanda leased the home from Mark's parents, defendants Michaeland Trudy Hellios. Mark and Amanda lacked insurance to cover injuries to invitees in their home. Alexus filed a three-count complaint alleging, inter alia, that Michael and Trudy knew or should haveknown that Haley was dangerous and therefore breached a duty to warn and protect her. Michaeland Trudy moved for summary judgment, arguing that they were landlords who had no control overthe premises and therefore owed Alexus no duty. The trial court granted Michael and Trudysummary judgment. Alexus appeals, arguing that summary judgment was inappropriate because (1)there is a question of material fact as to whether Michael and Trudy knew or should have known thatthe dog was dangerous, and (2) Michael and Trudy breached a duty to exercise reasonable care toprevent Alexus' injuries. We affirm, holding that, even if Michael and Trudy knew the dog wasdangerous, they had no duty to protect Alexus because they retained no control over the portion ofthe premises where the injury occurred.

FACTS

On April 17, 2000, Alexus was a 2