Home/Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York/Himes v. County of Chautauqua

Himes v. County of Chautauqua

175 A.D.2d 656, 572 N.Y.S.2d 829, 1991 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 10207
CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
DecidedJuly 12, 1991
StatusPublished

This text of 175 A.D.2d 656 (Himes v. County of Chautauqua) 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
Himes v. County of Chautauqua, 175 A.D.2d 656, 572 N.Y.S.2d 829, 1991 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 10207 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1991).

Opinion

— Order insofar as appealed from unanimously reversed on the law without costs and County of Chautauqua’s motion denied. Memorandum: Supreme Court should have denied defendant County of Chautauqua’s motion to dismiss. Plaintiff’s complaint must be liberally construed, with every allegation taken as true, to determine whether it pleads a legally cognizable claim (see, Guggenheimer v Ginzburg, 43 NY2d 268, 275; Burlew v American Mut. Ins. Co., 99 AD2d 11,15, affd 63 NY2d 412; Pietropaoli Trucking v Nationwide Mut. Ins. Co., 100 AD2d 680). The complaint states that defendant County of Chautauqua breached its duty in negligently failing to place Veronica Himes in an appropriate non-secure detention facility prior to the order of disposition (see, Family Ct Act § 739; County Law § 218-a). The complaint thus states a cognizable cause of action (see, Blanca C. v County of Nassau, 65 NY2d 712; Sinkler v County of Monroe, 127 AD2d 1006; Harris v State of New York, 117 AD2d 298, 302-303; [657]*657Bartels v County of Westchester, 76 AD2d 517). (Appeal from Order of Supreme Court, Chautauqua County, Ricotta, J.— Dismiss Complaint.) Present — Callahan, J. P., Doerr, Green, Pine and Lowery, JJ.

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

Related

Guggenheimer v. Ginzburg
372 N.E.2d 17 (New York Court of Appeals, 1977)
Burlew v. American Mutual Insurance
472 N.E.2d 682 (New York Court of Appeals, 1984)
Bartels v. County of Westchester
76 A.D.2d 517 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1980)
Burlew v. American Mutual Insurance
99 A.D.2d 11 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1984)
Roland Pietropaoli Trucking, Inc. v. Nationwide Mutual Insurance
100 A.D.2d 680 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1984)
Harris v. State
117 A.D.2d 298 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1986)
Sinkler v. County of Monroe
127 A.D.2d 1006 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1987)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
175 A.D.2d 656, 572 N.Y.S.2d 829, 1991 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 10207, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/himes-v-county-of-chautauqua-nyappdiv-1991.