From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Esannason v. New York City Housing Authority

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Jul 10, 1990
163 A.D.2d 160 (N.Y. App. Div. 1990)

Opinion

July 10, 1990

Appeal from the Supreme Court, New York County (Leland DeGrasse, J.).


Plaintiff's counsel has advanced a reasonable theory upon which suit was commenced against the defendant Housing Authority, despite being presented with the deed evidencing the fact that the playground where the infant plaintiff was injured had been conveyed by the New York City Housing Authority to the City of New York in 1952. The city denied the claim and stated that it was the Housing Authority that should be served. Thus, there is no basis upon which to impose counsel fees and/or sanctions upon the plaintiffs or their attorneys pursuant to CPLR 8303-a or section 130-1.1 of the Uniform Rules for Trial Courts. (See, CPLR 8303-a [c]; 22 NYCRR 130-1.1 [c]; see also, Narins v DeBrovner, 141 A.D.2d 381; compare, Hoeflich v. Chemical Bank, 149 A.D.2d 341, in which sanctions were imposed.)

Concur — Kupferman, J.P., Sullivan, Carro, Ellerin and Smith, JJ.


Summaries of

Esannason v. New York City Housing Authority

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Jul 10, 1990
163 A.D.2d 160 (N.Y. App. Div. 1990)
Case details for

Esannason v. New York City Housing Authority

Case Details

Full title:BARRY ESANNASON, an Infant, by His Mother and Natural Guardian, VALERIE…

Court:Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department

Date published: Jul 10, 1990

Citations

163 A.D.2d 160 (N.Y. App. Div. 1990)
557 N.Y.S.2d 377

Citing Cases

Yingrui Shang v. 231 W 15 Realty LLC

Accordingly, and in the exercise of this court's discretion, an order imposing sanctions and costs and fees…

Watson v. City of New York

Clearly, the proper use of sanctions is a desirable and appropriate way to discourage abusive litigation…