Moronta v. NYCHA

71 Misc. 3d 136(A), 2021 NY Slip Op 50430(U)
CourtAppellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York
DecidedMay 14, 2021
Docket570018/21
StatusUnpublished

This text of 71 Misc. 3d 136(A) (Moronta v. NYCHA) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Moronta v. NYCHA, 71 Misc. 3d 136(A), 2021 NY Slip Op 50430(U) (N.Y. Ct. App. 2021).

Opinion

Moronta v NYCHA (2021 NY Slip Op 50430(U)) [*1]

Moronta v NYCHA
2021 NY Slip Op 50430(U) [71 Misc 3d 136(A)]
Decided on May 14, 2021
Appellate Term, First Department
Published by New York State Law Reporting Bureau pursuant to Judiciary Law § 431.
This opinion is uncorrected and will not be published in the printed Official Reports.


Decided on May 14, 2021
SUPREME COURT, APPELLATE TERM, FIRST DEPARTMENT
PRESENT: Higgitt, J.P., Brigantti, Hagler, JJ.
570018/21

Trinidad Moronta, Plaintiff-Respondent,

against

NYCHA, Defendant-Appellant.


Defendant appeals from an order of the Civil Court of the City of New York, New York County (Denise M. Dominguez, J.), entered July 16, 2019, which denied its motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint and, on the court's own motion, granted plaintiff leave to serve an "amended" notice of claim within 60 days.

Per Curiam.

Order (Denise M. Dominguez, J.), entered July 16, 2019, reversed, without costs, defendant's motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint granted and the direction to file an "amended" notice of claim vacated. The Clerk is directed to enter judgment accordingly.

Defendant's motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint, on the ground that plaintiff failed to timely file a notice of claim, should have been granted. Plaintiff's January 5, 2017 notice of claim, which contained a claim for property damage that occurred in 2007, was a nullity, because it was untimely by nearly 10 years (see Public Housing Law § 157(2); General Municipal Law § 50-e[1][a]) and served without leave of court (see Croce v City of New York, 69 AD3d 488 [2010]; McGarty v City of New York, 44 AD3d 447, 448 [2007]). In the circumstances, "no attempt to amend that notice of claim is permitted" (Henry v Aguilar, 282 AD2d 711 [2001], lv denied 97 NY2d 602 [2001]; see Matter of White v New York City Hous. Auth., 38 AD3d 675 [2007]).

THIS CONSTITUTES THE DECISION AND ORDER OF THE COURT.

I concur I concurI concur
Decision Date: May 14, 2021

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

Related

White v. New York City Housing Authority
38 A.D.3d 675 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2007)
McGarty v. City of New York
44 A.D.3d 447 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2007)
Croce v. City of New York
69 A.D.3d 488 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2010)
Henry v. Aguilar
282 A.D.2d 711 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2001)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
71 Misc. 3d 136(A), 2021 NY Slip Op 50430(U), Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/moronta-v-nycha-nyappterm-2021.