Kilman v. Luna Park Housing Corp.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Kilman v. Luna Park Housing Corp.

272 A.D.2d 448, 708 N.Y.S.2d 330, 2000 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5576

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

DecidedMay 15, 2000

StatusPublished

This text of 272 A.D.2d 448 (Kilman v. Luna Park Housing Corp.) 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

Kilman v. Luna Park Housing Corp., 272 A.D.2d 448, 708 N.Y.S.2d 330, 2000 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5576 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2000).

Pincite

Opinion

—In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, etc., the plaintiffs appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Mason, J.), dated June 4, 1999, which granted the motion of the defendant York Scaffold Equipment Corp. to dismiss the complaint insofar as asserted against it on the ground that the action is time-barred.

Ordered that the order is modified by deleting the provision thereof granting the branch of the motion which was to dismiss the complaint insofar as asserted on behalf of the infant plaintiff, Farren Kilman, and substituting therefor a provision denying that branch of the motion; as so modified, the order is affirmed, with costs to the plaintiffs.

The complaint must be reinstated insofar as asserted on [449]*449behalf of the infant plaintiff, Farren Kilman, as CPLR 208 tolled the limitations period during her infancy (see, Henry v City of New York, 94 NY2d 275). O’Brien, J. P., Altman, Friedmann, McGinity and Smith, 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, Kings County (Mason, J.), dated June 4, 1999, which granted the motion of the defendant York Scaffold Equipment Corp. to dismiss the complaint insofar as asserted against it on the ground that the action is time-barred.

Ordered that the order is modified by deleting the provision thereof granting the branch of the motion which was to dismiss the complaint insofar as asserted on behalf of the infant plaintiff, Farren Kilman, and substituting therefor a provision denying that branch of the motion; as so modified, the order is affirmed, with costs to the plaintiffs.

The complaint must be reinstated insofar as asserted on [449]*449behalf of the infant plaintiff, Farren Kilman, as CPLR 208 tolled the limitations period during her infancy (see, Henry v City of New York, 94 NY2d 275). O’Brien, J. P., Altman, Friedmann, McGinity and Smith, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

272 A.D.2d 448, 708 N.Y.S.2d 330, 2000 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5576, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/kilman-v-luna-park-housing-corp-nyappdiv-2000.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack