Trowell v. New York City Health & Hospitals Corp.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Trowell v. New York City Health & Hospitals Corp.

305 A.D.2d 583, 759 N.Y.S.2d 357

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

DecidedMay 19, 2003

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 305 A.D.2d 583 (Trowell v. New York City Health & Hospitals Corp.) 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

Trowell v. New York City Health & Hospitals Corp., 305 A.D.2d 583, 759 N.Y.S.2d 357 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2003).

Pincite

Opinion

—In an action to recover damages for medical malpractice, the plaintiff appeals from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Flug, J.), entered December 20, 2001, which, [584]*584upon an order of the same court, dated October 17, 2001, inter alia, denying her motion for leave to amend the complaint, dismissed the complaint.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed, with costs.

The Supreme Court did not err in, inter alia, denying the plaintiffs motion for leave to amend the complaint to allege a cause of action sounding in negligence, as no such claim was set forth in the plaintiffs notice of claim (see Linden v President & Directors of Chase Manhattan Bank, 299 AD2d 216 [2002], lv denied 99 NY2d 509 [2003]; Mazzilli v City of New York, 154 AD2d 355 [1989]). Florio, J.P., S. Miller, Adams and Rivera, JJ., concur.

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

—In an action to recover damages for medical malpractice, the plaintiff appeals from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Flug, J.), entered December 20, 2001, which, [584]*584upon an order of the same court, dated October 17, 2001, inter alia, denying her motion for leave to amend the complaint, dismissed the complaint.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed, with costs.

The Supreme Court did not err in, inter alia, denying the plaintiffs motion for leave to amend the complaint to allege a cause of action sounding in negligence, as no such claim was set forth in the plaintiffs notice of claim (see Linden v President & Directors of Chase Manhattan Bank, 299 AD2d 216 [2002], lv denied 99 NY2d 509 [2003]; Mazzilli v City of New York, 154 AD2d 355 [1989]). Florio, J.P., S. Miller, Adams and Rivera, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

305 A.D.2d 583, 759 N.Y.S.2d 357, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/trowell-v-new-york-city-health-hospitals-corp-nyappdiv-2003.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack