Home/Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York/Riddick v. City of New York

Riddick v. City of New York

19 A.D.3d 265, 796 N.Y.S.2d 917, 2005 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 7029
CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
DecidedJune 23, 2005
StatusPublished

This text of 19 A.D.3d 265 (Riddick 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
Riddick v. City of New York, 19 A.D.3d 265, 796 N.Y.S.2d 917, 2005 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 7029 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2005).

Opinion

Orders, Supreme Court, Bronx County (Betty Owen Stinson, J.), entered January 28 and April 2, 2004, which dismissed the complaint for failure to state a cause of action, and entered November 30, 2004, which dismissed a subsequent complaint on grounds of res judicata, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

Plaintiffs failed to demonstrate the existence of a special relationship with any of the municipal defendants that would have given rise to a claim of negligence (Cuffy v City of New York, 69 NY2d 255, 260-261 [1987]). We have considered plaintiffs’ other arguments and find them without merit. Concur—Buckley, P.J., Tom, Andrias, Sullivan and Sweeny, JJ.

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

Related

Cuffy v. City of New York
505 N.E.2d 937 (New York Court of Appeals, 1987)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
19 A.D.3d 265, 796 N.Y.S.2d 917, 2005 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 7029, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/riddick-v-city-of-new-york-nyappdiv-2005.