Eichelbaum v. New York City Housing Authority

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Eichelbaum v. New York City Housing Authority

215 A.D.2d 526, 626 N.Y.S.2d 551, 1995 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5058

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

DecidedMay 15, 1995

StatusPublished

This text of 215 A.D.2d 526 (Eichelbaum v. New York City Housing Authority) 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

Eichelbaum v. New York City Housing Authority, 215 A.D.2d 526, 626 N.Y.S.2d 551, 1995 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5058 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1995).

Pincite

Opinion

In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, the defendants appeal from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Lisa, J.), dated May 9, 1994, as, in effect, denied their motion to dismiss the complaint and directed the plaintiff to appear for a physical examination pursuant to General Municipal Law § 50-h and Public Housing Law § 157 (2).

Ordered that the order is affirmed insofar as appealed from, with costs.

The Supreme Court properly denied the defendants’ motion to dismiss the complaint (see generally, Alouette Fashions v Consolidated Edison Co., 119 AD2d 481, 484-485, affd 69 NY2d 787). General Municipal Law § 50-h (2) provides, "No demand for examination shall be effective against the claimant for any purpose unless it shall be served as provided in this subdivision within ninety days from the date of filing of the notice of claim.” The defendants first served a proper demand for a physical examination of the plaintiff pursuant to General Municipal Law § 50-h (1) and (2) and Public Housing Law § 157 (2) on January 28, 1993, which is more than 90 days from the date of the filing of the notice of claim (see, General Municipal Law § 50-h [2]). Accordingly, the plaintiff was not precluded by General Municipal Law § 50-h (5) from commencing this action before appearing for the physical examination. Balletta, J. P., O’Brien, Thompson and Altman, 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, the defendants appeal from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Lisa, J.), dated May 9, 1994, as, in effect, denied their motion to dismiss the complaint and directed the plaintiff to appear for a physical examination pursuant to General Municipal Law § 50-h and Public Housing Law § 157 (2).

Ordered that the order is affirmed insofar as appealed from, with costs.

The Supreme Court properly denied the defendants’ motion to dismiss the complaint (see generally, Alouette Fashions v Consolidated Edison Co., 119 AD2d 481, 484-485, affd 69 NY2d 787). General Municipal Law § 50-h (2) provides, "No demand for examination shall be effective against the claimant for any purpose unless it shall be served as provided in this subdivision within ninety days from the date of filing of the notice of claim.” The defendants first served a proper demand for a physical examination of the plaintiff pursuant to General Municipal Law § 50-h (1) and (2) and Public Housing Law § 157 (2) on January 28, 1993, which is more than 90 days from the date of the filing of the notice of claim (see, General Municipal Law § 50-h [2]). Accordingly, the plaintiff was not precluded by General Municipal Law § 50-h (5) from commencing this action before appearing for the physical examination. Balletta, J. P., O’Brien, Thompson and Altman, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

215 A.D.2d 526, 626 N.Y.S.2d 551, 1995 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5058, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/eichelbaum-v-new-york-city-housing-authority-nyappdiv-1995.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack