Medina v. New York City Health & Hospital Corp.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Medina v. New York City Health & Hospital Corp.

22 A.D.3d 814, 802 N.Y.S.2d 627

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

DecidedOctober 31, 2005

StatusPublished

Cited by4 cases

This text of 22 A.D.3d 814 (Medina v. New York City Health & Hospital 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

Medina v. New York City Health & Hospital Corp., 22 A.D.3d 814, 802 N.Y.S.2d 627 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2005).

Pincite

Opinion

In an action to recover damages for [815]*815medical malpractice, the defendant New York City Health and Hospitals Corporation (Woodhull Medical and Mental Health Center) appeals from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Hutcherson, J.), dated June 18, 2004, as denied that branch of its cross motion which was for leave to renew that branch of the plaintiffs’ motion which was for leave to serve a late notice of claim on behalf of the plaintiff Andrew Medina, nunc pro tunc.

Ordered that the order is affirmed insofar as appealed from, with costs.

The Supreme Court providently exercised its discretion in denying that branch of the cross motion of the defendant New York City Health and Hospitals Corporation (Woodhull Medical and Mental Health Center) which was for leave to renew, as it was not based upon new facts which would have changed the prior determination (see CPLR 2221 [e] [2]; Kaufman v Kunis, 14 AD3d 542 [2005]; cf. Schwartz v Montefiore Hosp. & Med. Ctr., 305 AD2d 174, 176 [2003]). Florio, J.P., Crane, Ritter and Lifson, 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 [815]*815medical malpractice, the defendant New York City Health and Hospitals Corporation (Woodhull Medical and Mental Health Center) appeals from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Hutcherson, J.), dated June 18, 2004, as denied that branch of its cross motion which was for leave to renew that branch of the plaintiffs’ motion which was for leave to serve a late notice of claim on behalf of the plaintiff Andrew Medina, nunc pro tunc.

Ordered that the order is affirmed insofar as appealed from, with costs.

The Supreme Court providently exercised its discretion in denying that branch of the cross motion of the defendant New York City Health and Hospitals Corporation (Woodhull Medical and Mental Health Center) which was for leave to renew, as it was not based upon new facts which would have changed the prior determination (see CPLR 2221 [e] [2]; Kaufman v Kunis, 14 AD3d 542 [2005]; cf. Schwartz v Montefiore Hosp. & Med. Ctr., 305 AD2d 174, 176 [2003]). Florio, J.P., Crane, Ritter and Lifson, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

22 A.D.3d 814, 802 N.Y.S.2d 627, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/medina-v-new-york-city-health-hospital-corp-nyappdiv-2005.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack