Rohman v. New York City Transit Authority

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Rohman v. New York City Transit Authority

295 A.D.2d 333, 742 N.Y.S.2d 911, 2002 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5720

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

DecidedJune 3, 2002

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 295 A.D.2d 333 (Rohman v. New York City Transit Authority) 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

Rohman v. New York City Transit Authority, 295 A.D.2d 333, 742 N.Y.S.2d 911, 2002 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5720 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2002).

Pincite

Opinion

—In an action, inter alia, to recover damages for malicious prosecution, the defendant Carmen J. Bianco appeals from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Hutcherson, J.), dated April 24, 2001, as denied his motion for summary judgment dismissing the cause of action to recover damages for malicious prosecution insofar as asserted against him.

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

The Supreme Court was not obligated by the doctrine of the law of the case to follow a determination of the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit that the plaintiff failed to establish the elements of a federal constitutional claim pursuant to 42 USC § 1983 against the defendant Carmen J. Bianco (see Rohman v New York City Tr. Auth., 215 F3d 208; Freer v Mayer, 223 AD2d 667).

The defendant Carmen J. Bianco failed to establish his entitlement to summary judgment as there are material issues of fact regarding his initiation of a criminal prosecution against the plaintiff (see Dudick v Gulyas, 277 AD2d 686, 687; Dempsey v Masto, 83 AD2d 725, affd 56 NY2d 665), and the application of qualified immunity to the facts of this case (see Quigley v City of Auburn, 267 AD2d 978, 979; cf. Arteaga v State of New York, 72 NY2d 212, 216; Tango v Tulevech, 61 NY2d 34, 40; Rottkamp v Young, 21 AD2d 373, 375, affd 15 NY2d 831). Accordingly, the Supreme Court properly denied the motion of the defendant Carmen J. Bianco for summary judgment. O’Brien, J.P., Friedmann, H. Miller and Crane, JJ., concur.

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

—In an action, inter alia, to recover damages for malicious prosecution, the defendant Carmen J. Bianco appeals from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Hutcherson, J.), dated April 24, 2001, as denied his motion for summary judgment dismissing the cause of action to recover damages for malicious prosecution insofar as asserted against him.

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

The Supreme Court was not obligated by the doctrine of the law of the case to follow a determination of the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit that the plaintiff failed to establish the elements of a federal constitutional claim pursuant to 42 USC § 1983 against the defendant Carmen J. Bianco (see Rohman v New York City Tr. Auth., 215 F3d 208; Freer v Mayer, 223 AD2d 667).

The defendant Carmen J. Bianco failed to establish his entitlement to summary judgment as there are material issues of fact regarding his initiation of a criminal prosecution against the plaintiff (see Dudick v Gulyas, 277 AD2d 686, 687; Dempsey v Masto, 83 AD2d 725, affd 56 NY2d 665), and the application of qualified immunity to the facts of this case (see Quigley v City of Auburn, 267 AD2d 978, 979; cf. Arteaga v State of New York, 72 NY2d 212, 216; Tango v Tulevech, 61 NY2d 34, 40; Rottkamp v Young, 21 AD2d 373, 375, affd 15 NY2d 831). Accordingly, the Supreme Court properly denied the motion of the defendant Carmen J. Bianco for summary judgment. O’Brien, J.P., Friedmann, H. Miller and Crane, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

295 A.D.2d 333, 742 N.Y.S.2d 911, 2002 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5720, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/rohman-v-new-york-city-transit-authority-nyappdiv-2002.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack