§Why CasetextPricing

In the Matter of Ryszard Grajko, Appellant,v.City of New York, et al., Respondents.

Brief

11 Cited authorities

  1. Newcomb v. Middle Country Cent. Sch. Dist.

    2016 N.Y. Slip Op. 8581 (N.Y. 2016)   Cited 326 times
    In Newcomb, the Court of Appeals endorsed a new rule establishing a shifting burden of proof in demonstrating that a late notice of claim substantially prejudices a public corporation (see 28 N.Y.3d at 467, 45 N.Y.S.3d 895, 68 N.E.3d 714).

  2. Perez v. City of N.Y

    41 A.D.3d 378 (N.Y. App. Div. 2007)   Cited 136 times
    Holding that "the City and the [BOE] remain separate legal entities"

  3. Harris v. City of New York

    297 A.D.2d 473 (N.Y. App. Div. 2002)   Cited 64 times
    Holding lack of notice and the passage of time will prejudice city because it won't be able to find witnesses or conduct a proper investigation

  4. Gonzalez v. City of N.Y.

    127 A.D.3d 632 (N.Y. App. Div. 2015)   Cited 37 times   1 Legal Analyses

    13993N, 260017/13. 04-28-2015 In re Anthony GONZALEZ, et al., Petitioners–Respondents, v. The CITY OF NEW YORK, et al., Respondents–Appellants. Fabiani Cohen & Hall, LLP, New York (Antonino Lugara of counsel), for appellants. Fortunato & Fortunato, PLLC, Brooklyn (Annamarie Fortunato of counsel), for respondents. Fabiani Cohen & Hall, LLP, New York (Antonino Lugara of counsel), for appellants. Fortunato & Fortunato, PLLC, Brooklyn (Annamarie Fortunato of counsel), for respondents. TOM, J.P., SAXE

  5. Kuterman v. City of N.Y.

    121 A.D.3d 646 (N.Y. App. Div. 2014)   Cited 33 times

    2014-10-1 Aleksandr KUTERMAN, respondent, v. CITY OF NEW YORK, appellant. (Matter No. 1). In the Matter of Aleksandr Kuterman, respondent, v. City of New York, appellant. (Matter No. 2). Zachary W. Carter, Corporation Counsel, New York, N.Y. (Edward F.X. Hart and Julie Steiner of counsel), for appellant. Sacco & Fillas, LLP, Astoria, N.Y. (Nissim Abaev of counsel), for respondent. REINALDO E. RIVERA Zachary W. Carter, Corporation Counsel, New York, N.Y. (Edward F.X. Hart and Julie Steiner of counsel)

  6. Casale v. City of N.Y.

    95 A.D.3d 744 (N.Y. App. Div. 2012)   Cited 26 times

    2012-05-29 In re Joseph J. CASALE, et al., Petitioners–Respondents, v. The CITY OF NEW YORK, Respondent–Appellant. Morris, Duffy Alonso & Faley, New York (Anna J. Ervolina and Andrea Alonso of counsel), for appellant. Pollack, Pollack, Isaac & DeCicco, New York (Brian J. Isaac of counsel), for respondents. FRIEDMAN Morris, Duffy Alonso & Faley, New York (Anna J. Ervolina and Andrea Alonso of counsel), for appellant. Pollack, Pollack, Isaac & DeCicco, New York (Brian J. Isaac of counsel), for respondents

  7. Thompson v. City of New York

    95 A.D.3d 1024 (N.Y. App. Div. 2012)   Cited 22 times

    2012-05-8 In the Matter of Stephen THOMPSON, et al., appellants, v. CITY OF NEW YORK, et al., respondents. Harmon, Linder & Rogowsky, New York, N.Y. (Mitchell Dranow of counsel), for appellants. Michael A. Cardozo, Corporation Counsel, New York, N.Y. (Kristin M. Helmers of counsel; Sean M. Nelson on the brief), for respondents. Harmon, Linder & Rogowsky, New York, N.Y. (Mitchell Dranow of counsel), for appellants. Michael A. Cardozo, Corporation Counsel, New York, N.Y. (Kristin M. Helmers of counsel;

  8. Borrero v. N.Y.C. Hous. Auth.

    134 A.D.3d 1104 (N.Y. App. Div. 2015)   Cited 10 times

    12-30-2015 In the Matter of Oscar BORRERO, respondent, v. NEW YORK CITY HOUSING AUTHORITY, appellant. Herzfeld & Rubin, P.C., New York, N.Y. (Linda M. Brown of counsel), for appellant. Goidel & Siegel, LLP, New York, N.Y. (Andrew B. Siegel of counsel), for respondent. Herzfeld & Rubin, P.C., New York, N.Y. (Linda M. Brown of counsel), for appellant. Goidel & Siegel, LLP, New York, N.Y. (Andrew B. Siegel of counsel), for respondent. JOHN M. LEVENTHAL, J.P., LEONARD B. AUSTIN, SHERI S. ROMAN, ROBERT

  9. Gold v. City of New York

    80 A.D.2d 138 (N.Y. App. Div. 1981)   Cited 30 times
    In Gold, the minor plaintiff sued the City of New York and the Board of Education for injuries sustained on school property.

  10. Guaspari v. Gorsky

    29 N.Y.2d 891 (N.Y. 1972)   Cited 25 times

    Argued November 23, 1971 Decided January 5, 1972 Appeal from the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the Fourth Judicial Department, RICHARD D. SIMONS, J. Donald L. Schoenwald for appellant. Paul L. Pileckas for respondents. Appeal dismissed, without costs, on the ground that no appeal lies as of right under CPLR 5601 (subd. [a], par. [i]), since neither of the dissents in the Appellate Division is on a stated question of law which would be reviewable in this court. Both dissents rest only

  11. Section 500.10 - Examination of subject matter jurisdiction

    N.Y. Comp. Codes R. & Regs. tit. 22 § 500.10   Cited 14 times
    Failing to raise issues before Court of Appeals precludes further review because the Petitioner has already made the one application for leave to appeal to which he is entitled