Dill v. County of Westchester

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Dill v. County of Westchester

4 A.D.2d 779, 165 N.Y.S.2d 623, 1957 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4739

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

DecidedJuly 15, 1957

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 4 A.D.2d 779 (Dill v. County of Westchester) 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

Dill v. County of Westchester, 4 A.D.2d 779, 165 N.Y.S.2d 623, 1957 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4739 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1957).

Pincite

Opinion

In an action to recover damages for false imprisonment, the appeal is from an order granting motions for judgment on the pleadings dismissing the complaint and from the judgment entered thereon and from an order denying a motion for leave to serve an amended complaint. Orders and judgment unanimously affirmed, with $10 costs and disbursements. The false imprisonment alleged in the complaint and in the notice of claim was commenced on January 1, 1956 and terminated with appellant’s discharge, after he had been found sane by a jury in a proceeding under section 76 of the Mental Hygiene Law on March 16, 1956. A cause of action for false imprisonment accrues the instant the imprisonment takes place and becomes complete the moment the detention ceases (Dusenbury v. Kielly, 58 How. Prac. 286, affd. 85 N. Y. 383; Tierney v. State of New York, 266 App. Div. 434, affd. 292 N. Y. 523; Salerno v. Lansing, 269 App. Div. 810). The notice of claim was not served until June 15, 1956, which is not within the 90-day period required by section 50-e of the General Municipal Law. Present — Nolan, P. J., Wenzel, Beldoek, Ughetta and Kleinfeld, JJ. [5 Misc 2d 869.]

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

In an action to recover damages for false imprisonment, the appeal is from an order granting motions for judgment on the pleadings dismissing the complaint and from the judgment entered thereon and from an order denying a motion for leave to serve an amended complaint. Orders and judgment unanimously affirmed, with $10 costs and disbursements. The false imprisonment alleged in the complaint and in the notice of claim was commenced on January 1, 1956 and terminated with appellant’s discharge, after he had been found sane by a jury in a proceeding under section 76 of the Mental Hygiene Law on March 16, 1956. A cause of action for false imprisonment accrues the instant the imprisonment takes place and becomes complete the moment the detention ceases (Dusenbury v. Kielly, 58 How. Prac. 286, affd. 85 N. Y. 383; Tierney v. State of New York, 266 App. Div. 434, affd. 292 N. Y. 523; Salerno v. Lansing, 269 App. Div. 810). The notice of claim was not served until June 15, 1956, which is not within the 90-day period required by section 50-e of the General Municipal Law. Present — Nolan, P. J., Wenzel, Beldoek, Ughetta and Kleinfeld, JJ. [5 Misc 2d 869.]

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

4 A.D.2d 779, 165 N.Y.S.2d 623, 1957 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4739, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/dill-v-county-of-westchester-nyappdiv-1957.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack