Hui Min Li v. City of New York

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Hui Min Li v. City of New York

89 A.D.3d 593, 933 N.Y.2d 30

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided November 22, 2011·Published

Opinion

Defendant failed to demonstrate conclusively that plaintiff’s cause of action for false imprisonment as against it is without merit (see Martinez v City of Schenectady, 97 NY2d 78, 85 [2001]). The conflicting testimony presents issues of fact whether plaintiff was detained or remained voluntarily in the store after defendant accused her of stealing rice cakes and, if she was detained, whether the detention was conducted in a reasonable manner (see General Business Law § 218).

To the extent plaintiffs cause of action for violation of civil rights pursuant to 42 USC § 1983 is asserted against this defendant, it should be dismissed because the record is bereft of any indication that defendant was acting under color of state law (see Rodriguez v City of New York, 87 AD3d 867 [2011]).

We have considered defendant’s remaining contentions and find them unavailing. Concur — Saxe, J.E, Sweeny, Richter and Manzanet-Daniels, JJ.

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

Defendant failed to demonstrate conclusively that plaintiff’s cause of action for false imprisonment as against it is without merit (see Martinez v City of Schenectady, 97 NY2d 78, 85 [2001]). The conflicting testimony presents issues of fact whether plaintiff was detained or remained voluntarily in the store after defendant accused her of stealing rice cakes and, if she was detained, whether the detention was conducted in a reasonable manner (see General Business Law § 218).

To the extent plaintiffs cause of action for violation of civil rights pursuant to 42 USC § 1983 is asserted against this defendant, it should be dismissed because the record is bereft of any indication that defendant was acting under color of state law (see Rodriguez v City of New York, 87 AD3d 867 [2011]).

We have considered defendant’s remaining contentions and find them unavailing. Concur — Saxe, J.E, Sweeny, Richter and Manzanet-Daniels, JJ.

Hui Min Li v. City of New York, 89 A.D.3d 593, 933 N.Y.2d 30 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2011).

Pincite

89 A.D.3d 593 (Hui Min Li v. City of New York) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related