Foley v. New York Blood Center, Inc.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Foley v. New York Blood Center, Inc.

278 A.D.2d 42, 716 N.Y.S.2d 858, 2000 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 12692

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

DecidedDecember 7, 2000

StatusPublished

This text of 278 A.D.2d 42 (Foley v. New York Blood Center, Inc.) 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

Foley v. New York Blood Center, Inc., 278 A.D.2d 42, 716 N.Y.S.2d 858, 2000 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 12692 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2000).

Pincite

Opinion

Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Elliott Wilk, J.), entered on or about September 7, 1999, which, in an action alleging that plaintiff was transfused with HIV-infected blood during cardiac bypass surgery performed at defendant hospital, granted plaintiffs motion to [43]*43reargue a prior order, entered on or about February 1, 1999, granting defendant’s post-answer motion to dismiss the complaint as time-barred under CPLR 214-c, and, upon reargument, denied the motion with leave to renew upon proper papers, including an amended answer affirmatively pleading CPLR 214-c as a defense, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

Defendant’s motion to dismiss on the ground of CPLR 214-c was properly denied without prejudice where defendant had served an answer that pleaded only CPLR 214, not CPLR 214-c, as a time bar (see, CPLR 3211 [e]). Concur — Rosenberger, J. P., Williams, Andrias, Buckley and Friedman, JJ.

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

Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Elliott Wilk, J.), entered on or about September 7, 1999, which, in an action alleging that plaintiff was transfused with HIV-infected blood during cardiac bypass surgery performed at defendant hospital, granted plaintiffs motion to [43]*43reargue a prior order, entered on or about February 1, 1999, granting defendant’s post-answer motion to dismiss the complaint as time-barred under CPLR 214-c, and, upon reargument, denied the motion with leave to renew upon proper papers, including an amended answer affirmatively pleading CPLR 214-c as a defense, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

Defendant’s motion to dismiss on the ground of CPLR 214-c was properly denied without prejudice where defendant had served an answer that pleaded only CPLR 214, not CPLR 214-c, as a time bar (see, CPLR 3211 [e]). Concur — Rosenberger, J. P., Williams, Andrias, Buckley and Friedman, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

278 A.D.2d 42, 716 N.Y.S.2d 858, 2000 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 12692, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/foley-v-new-york-blood-center-inc-nyappdiv-2000.