Jackson v. New York City Housing Authority

46 A.D.3d 297, 845 N.Y.S.2d 912

Opinion

Order, Supreme Court, Bronx County (Mark Friedlander, J.), entered March 8, 2006, which granted defendant’s motion to strike portions of the complaint and bill of particulars, unanimously reversed, on the law, without costs, and those portions reinstated.

The notice of claim sufficiently enabled defendant to “locate the place, fix the time and understand the nature” of the claim (Brown v City of New York, 95 NY2d 389, 393 [2000]) so it could “investigate, collect evidence and evaluate the merit of [that] claim” (id. at 392). Plaintiffs later allegations did not raise a new, distinct and independent theory of liability so as to prejudice defendant in its investigation and evaluation of the claim (cf. Monmasterio v New York City Hous. Auth., 39 AD3d 354 [2007]). Concur—Tom, J.P., Saxe, Friedman, Gonzalez and Catterson, JJ.

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

Jackson v. New York City Housing Authority, 46 A.D.3d 297, 845 N.Y.S.2d 912 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2007).

46 A.D.3d 297 (Jackson v. New York City Housing Authority) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Brown v. City of New York
740 N.E.2d 1078 (New York Court of Appeals, 2000)
Monmasterio v. New York City Housing Authority
39 A.D.3d 354 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2007)