Anilyan v. Board of Education

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Anilyan v. Board of Education

115 A.D.2d 515, 496 N.Y.S.2d 690, 1985 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 54922

CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York

DecidedDecember 9, 1985

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 115 A.D.2d 515 (Anilyan v. Board of Education) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Anilyan v. Board of Education, 115 A.D.2d 515, 496 N.Y.S.2d 690, 1985 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 54922 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1985).

Pincite

Opinion

In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, plaintiff appeals, as limited by her brief, from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Held, J.), dated October 9, 1984, as granted defendants’ motion to dismiss the complaint and for summary judgment.

Order affirmed, insofar as appealed from, without costs or disbursements.

[516]*516Defendants cannot be held liable in this matter absent a special duty owed to plaintiff (see, e.g., Vitale v City of New York, 60 NY2d 861, 863, rearg denied 61 NY2d 759; Glick v City of New York, 53 AD2d 528, affd 42 NY2d 831). The facts testified to by plaintiff at the Comptroller’s hearing are insufficient to raise a genuine issue as to the existence of such a duty (see, Corcoran v Community School Dist. 17, 114 AD2d 835). Lazer, J. P., Thompson, O’Connor, Rubin and Kunzeman, JJ., concur.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, plaintiff appeals, as limited by her brief, from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Held, J.), dated October 9, 1984, as granted defendants’ motion to dismiss the complaint and for summary judgment.

Order affirmed, insofar as appealed from, without costs or disbursements.

[516]*516Defendants cannot be held liable in this matter absent a special duty owed to plaintiff (see, e.g., Vitale v City of New York, 60 NY2d 861, 863, rearg denied 61 NY2d 759; Glick v City of New York, 53 AD2d 528, affd 42 NY2d 831). The facts testified to by plaintiff at the Comptroller’s hearing are insufficient to raise a genuine issue as to the existence of such a duty (see, Corcoran v Community School Dist. 17, 114 AD2d 835). Lazer, J. P., Thompson, O’Connor, Rubin and Kunzeman, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

115 A.D.2d 515, 496 N.Y.S.2d 690, 1985 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 54922, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/anilyan-v-board-of-education-nyappdiv-1985.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack