Jackson v. Newburgh Enlarged City School District

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Jackson v. Newburgh Enlarged City School District

259 A.D.2d 521, 684 N.Y.S.2d 900, 1999 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 2205

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

DecidedMarch 8, 1999

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 259 A.D.2d 521 (Jackson v. Newburgh Enlarged City School District) 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

Jackson v. Newburgh Enlarged City School District, 259 A.D.2d 521, 684 N.Y.S.2d 900, 1999 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 2205 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1999).

Pincite

Opinion

In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, etc., the defendant appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Orange County (Peter C. Patsalos, J.), dated February 19, 1998, which granted the plaintiffs’ motion to vacate an order of the same court, dated December 8, 1997, granting the defendant’s motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint upon the plaintiffs’ default in opposing the motion, and, upon vacatur, denied the defendant’s motion.

[522]*522Ordered that the order is reversed, with costs, the motion is denied, and the order dated December 8, 1997, is reinstated.

This action arises from the fall and resultant injury of a student in a junior high school, allegedly caused by another student. Regardless of the plaintiffs’ reasons for failing to oppose the defendant’s summary judgment motion, they have not provided evidence of a meritorious claim so as to require vacatur of the order dated December 8, 1997, pursuant to CPLR 5015 (see, e.g., Peacock v Kalikow, 239 AD2d 188, 190). There was no evidence put forth in any of the plaintiffs’ submissions that the infant plaintiff was intentionally caused to fall by a certain student, nor was there evidence that the defendant had notice that this student’s behavior posed a threat to the infant plaintiff or other students in the school (see, Mirand v City of New York, 84 NY2d 44; see also, Lawes v Board of Educ., 16 NY2d 302). S. Miller, J. P., Sullivan, Friedmann and Luciano, 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, etc., the defendant appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Orange County (Peter C. Patsalos, J.), dated February 19, 1998, which granted the plaintiffs’ motion to vacate an order of the same court, dated December 8, 1997, granting the defendant’s motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint upon the plaintiffs’ default in opposing the motion, and, upon vacatur, denied the defendant’s motion.

[522]*522Ordered that the order is reversed, with costs, the motion is denied, and the order dated December 8, 1997, is reinstated.

This action arises from the fall and resultant injury of a student in a junior high school, allegedly caused by another student. Regardless of the plaintiffs’ reasons for failing to oppose the defendant’s summary judgment motion, they have not provided evidence of a meritorious claim so as to require vacatur of the order dated December 8, 1997, pursuant to CPLR 5015 (see, e.g., Peacock v Kalikow, 239 AD2d 188, 190). There was no evidence put forth in any of the plaintiffs’ submissions that the infant plaintiff was intentionally caused to fall by a certain student, nor was there evidence that the defendant had notice that this student’s behavior posed a threat to the infant plaintiff or other students in the school (see, Mirand v City of New York, 84 NY2d 44; see also, Lawes v Board of Educ., 16 NY2d 302). S. Miller, J. P., Sullivan, Friedmann and Luciano, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

259 A.D.2d 521, 684 N.Y.S.2d 900, 1999 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 2205, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/jackson-v-newburgh-enlarged-city-school-district-nyappdiv-1999.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack