Osinowo v. Secretary of the Port Authority

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Osinowo v. Secretary of the Port Authority

212 A.D.2d 387, 623 N.Y.S.2d 105, 1995 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 1238

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided February 7, 1995·Published

Opinion

—Order, Supreme Court, Bronx County (Bertram Katz, J.), entered February 15, 1994, which granted defendant’s motion to dismiss the complaint, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

Plaintiffs failure to commence the action within one year after his causes of action accrued, as mandated by McKinney’s Unconsolidated Laws of NY § 7107 (L 1950, ch 301, § 7), amounts to a jurisdictional defect requiring dismissal of the action (Lumbermens Mut. Cas. Co. v Port Auth., 137 AD2d 796). Concur—Ellerin, J. P., Kupferman, Asch, Nardelli and Williams, JJ.

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

—Order, Supreme Court, Bronx County (Bertram Katz, J.), entered February 15, 1994, which granted defendant’s motion to dismiss the complaint, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

Plaintiffs failure to commence the action within one year after his causes of action accrued, as mandated by McKinney’s Unconsolidated Laws of NY § 7107 (L 1950, ch 301, § 7), amounts to a jurisdictional defect requiring dismissal of the action (Lumbermens Mut. Cas. Co. v Port Auth., 137 AD2d 796). Concur—Ellerin, J. P., Kupferman, Asch, Nardelli and Williams, JJ.

Osinowo v. Secretary of the Port Authority, 212 A.D.2d 387, 623 N.Y.S.2d 105, 1995 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 1238 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1995).

Pincite

212 A.D.2d 387 (Osinowo v. Secretary of the Port Authority) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related