Kastansis v. City of New York

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Kastansis v. City of New York

292 A.D.2d 347, 739 N.Y.S.2d 576, 2002 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 2206

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

DecidedMarch 4, 2002

StatusPublished

This text of 292 A.D.2d 347 (Kastansis v. City of New York) 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

Kastansis v. City of New York, 292 A.D.2d 347, 739 N.Y.S.2d 576, 2002 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 2206 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2002).

Pincite

Opinion

In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, etc., the plaintiffs appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Taylor, J.), dated February 20, 2001, which granted the motion of the defendant City of New York to dismiss the complaint insofar as asserted against it, and denied their cross motion for leave to amend the notice of claim.

Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs.

Under the circumstances of this case, the Supreme Court properly granted the motion of the defendant City of New York to dismiss the complaint insofar as asserted against it, and denied the plaintiffs’ cross motion for leave to amend the notice of claim {see, Taylor v New York City Hous. Auth., 248 AD2d [348]*348376; Eherts v County of Orange, 215 AD2d 524). Altman, J.P., Smith, Krausman, McGinity and Cozier, 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 plaintiffs appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Taylor, J.), dated February 20, 2001, which granted the motion of the defendant City of New York to dismiss the complaint insofar as asserted against it, and denied their cross motion for leave to amend the notice of claim.

Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs.

Under the circumstances of this case, the Supreme Court properly granted the motion of the defendant City of New York to dismiss the complaint insofar as asserted against it, and denied the plaintiffs’ cross motion for leave to amend the notice of claim {see, Taylor v New York City Hous. Auth., 248 AD2d [348]*348376; Eherts v County of Orange, 215 AD2d 524). Altman, J.P., Smith, Krausman, McGinity and Cozier, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

292 A.D.2d 347, 739 N.Y.S.2d 576, 2002 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 2206, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/kastansis-v-city-of-new-york-nyappdiv-2002.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack