Wells v. City of New York

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Wells v. City of New York

254 A.D.2d 121, 678 N.Y.S.2d 498, 1998 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 10829

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

DecidedOctober 15, 1998

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 254 A.D.2d 121 (Wells 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

Wells v. City of New York, 254 A.D.2d 121, 678 N.Y.S.2d 498, 1998 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 10829 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1998).

Pincite

Opinion

Order, Supreme Court, Bronx County (Douglas McKeon, J.), entered December 9, 1997, which, in an action by pro se plaintiff prisoner against defendants City and municipal hospital corporation for inadequate medical care, commenced prior to completion of plaintiffs General Municipal Law § 50-h hearing pursuant to stipulation, insofar as appealable, denied what was deemed to be a motion by plaintiff to renew an order, entered February 10,1997, denying plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment and granting defendants’ cross motion to dismiss the action with prejudice, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

Plaintiff’s motion to renew was properly denied for failure to present any new facts that could not have been adduced on the prior motion. In any event, were we to grant renewal and review the merits, we would dismiss the action for the same reasons as did the motion court, namely, plaintiff’s failure to reschedule or appear for a section 50-h hearing after being given numerous extensions and opportunities to do so (see, Bailey v New York City Health & Hosps. Corp., 191 AD2d 606, citing Best v City of New York, 97 AD2d 389, affd 61 NY2d 847). Concur — Milonas, J. P., Rosenberger, Ellerin and Rubin, JJ.

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

Order, Supreme Court, Bronx County (Douglas McKeon, J.), entered December 9, 1997, which, in an action by pro se plaintiff prisoner against defendants City and municipal hospital corporation for inadequate medical care, commenced prior to completion of plaintiffs General Municipal Law § 50-h hearing pursuant to stipulation, insofar as appealable, denied what was deemed to be a motion by plaintiff to renew an order, entered February 10,1997, denying plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment and granting defendants’ cross motion to dismiss the action with prejudice, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

Plaintiff’s motion to renew was properly denied for failure to present any new facts that could not have been adduced on the prior motion. In any event, were we to grant renewal and review the merits, we would dismiss the action for the same reasons as did the motion court, namely, plaintiff’s failure to reschedule or appear for a section 50-h hearing after being given numerous extensions and opportunities to do so (see, Bailey v New York City Health & Hosps. Corp., 191 AD2d 606, citing Best v City of New York, 97 AD2d 389, affd 61 NY2d 847). Concur — Milonas, J. P., Rosenberger, Ellerin and Rubin, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

254 A.D.2d 121, 678 N.Y.S.2d 498, 1998 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 10829, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/wells-v-city-of-new-york-nyappdiv-1998.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack