Lindo v. City of New York

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Lindo v. City of New York

272 A.D.2d 90, 708 N.Y.S.2d 288, 2000 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4928

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

DecidedMay 4, 2000

StatusPublished

This text of 272 A.D.2d 90 (Lindo 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

Lindo v. City of New York, 272 A.D.2d 90, 708 N.Y.S.2d 288, 2000 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4928 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2000).

Pincite

Opinion

—Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Richard Braun, J.), entered March 18, 1999, which, insofar as appealed from, denied petitioner’s application to serve a late notice of claim for malicious prosecution, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

The proposed claim for malicious prosecution, which alleges [91]*91that the underlying criminal prosecution against petitioner was dismissed pursuant to CPL 30.30, is patently without merit (see, Witcher v Children’s Tel. Workshop, 187 AD2d 292; cf., Hankins v Great Atl. & Pac. Tea Co., 208 AD2d 111, 115-116). Thus, permission to serve the claim late was properly refused (see, Weiss v City of New York, 237 AD2d 212, 213). Concur — Rubin, J. P., Andrias, Saxe, Buckley and Friedman, JJ. [Recalled and vacated, 277 AD2d-(1st Dept., Nov. 16, 2000).]

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

—Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Richard Braun, J.), entered March 18, 1999, which, insofar as appealed from, denied petitioner’s application to serve a late notice of claim for malicious prosecution, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

The proposed claim for malicious prosecution, which alleges [91]*91that the underlying criminal prosecution against petitioner was dismissed pursuant to CPL 30.30, is patently without merit (see, Witcher v Children’s Tel. Workshop, 187 AD2d 292; cf., Hankins v Great Atl. & Pac. Tea Co., 208 AD2d 111, 115-116). Thus, permission to serve the claim late was properly refused (see, Weiss v City of New York, 237 AD2d 212, 213). Concur — Rubin, J. P., Andrias, Saxe, Buckley and Friedman, JJ. [Recalled and vacated, 277 AD2d-(1st Dept., Nov. 16, 2000).]

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

272 A.D.2d 90, 708 N.Y.S.2d 288, 2000 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4928, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/lindo-v-city-of-new-york-nyappdiv-2000.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack