Otero v. New York City Housing Authority

New York Court of Appeals

Otero v. New York City Housing Authority

723 N.E.2d 53, 94 N.Y.2d 800, 701 N.Y.S.2d 304, 1999 N.Y. LEXIS 3731

CourtNew York Court of Appeals

DecidedNovember 18, 1999

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 723 N.E.2d 53 (Otero v. New York City Housing Authority) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering New York Court of Appeals primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Otero v. New York City Housing Authority, 723 N.E.2d 53, 94 N.Y.2d 800, 701 N.Y.S.2d 304, 1999 N.Y. LEXIS 3731 (N.Y. 1999).

Pincite

Opinion

OPINION OF THE COURT

Memorandum.

The order of the Appellate Division should be affirmed, with costs, and the certified question should be answered in the affirmative.

Plaintiff filed a summons and complaint in 1994. An index number previously secured and paid for by plaintiff with respect to his late-notice-of-claim application, was assigned to the action. In 1997, at the request of the County Clerk, plaintiff purchased a second index number, which was then re-assigned to the action.

Defendant moved to dismiss the action on the ground that plaintiff “never filed the summons and complaint pursuant to CPLR 304.” Supreme Court denied the motion and the Appellate Division affirmed, without opinion. The Appellate Division then granted leave to appeal.

Under the unique and opaque factual circumstances of this case, the fiscal underpinnings of the commencement-by-filing system do not support turning plaintiff out of his day in court.

Chief Judge Kaye and Judges Bellacosa, Smith, Levine, Ciparick, Wesley and Rosenblatt concur in memorandum.

Order affirmed, etc.

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