From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Ruiz v. New York City Housing Authority

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Jun 29, 1995
629 N.Y.S.2d 222 (N.Y. App. Div. 1995)

Summary

In Ruiz v. New York City Hous. Auth. (216 A.D.2d 258), we held that a similar motion to dismiss was properly denied "as based on plaintiff's failure to appear for a physical examination, where the date for such examination had been postponed indefinitely and defendant never attempted to secure its right thereto by serving plaintiff with another demand therefor (compare, Best v. City of New York, 97 A.D.2d 389, affd 61 N.Y.2d 847)."

Summary of this case from Ramos v. New York City Housing Authority

Opinion

June 29, 1995

Appeal from the Supreme Court, New York County (Harold Tompkins, J.).


The motion was properly denied insofar as based on plaintiff's failure to appear for a physical examination, where the date for such examination had been postponed indefinitely and defendant never attempted to secure its right thereto by serving plaintiff with another demand therefor ( compare, Best v. City of New York, 97 A.D.2d 389, affd 61 N.Y.2d 847). Nor should the action be dismissed for failure to comply with CPLR 306-a and 306-b, where plaintiff had served defendant with the summons and complaint in this action under the index number purchased in the prior related and successful proceeding to serve a late notice of claim, the revenue-raising purposes of the statutory scheme were satisfied by plaintiff's eventual purchase of a new index number, and defendant suffered no prejudice (CPLR 2001).

Concur — Rosenberger, J.P., Kupferman, Asch, Nardelli and Mazzarelli, JJ.


Summaries of

Ruiz v. New York City Housing Authority

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Jun 29, 1995
629 N.Y.S.2d 222 (N.Y. App. Div. 1995)

In Ruiz v. New York City Hous. Auth. (216 A.D.2d 258), we held that a similar motion to dismiss was properly denied "as based on plaintiff's failure to appear for a physical examination, where the date for such examination had been postponed indefinitely and defendant never attempted to secure its right thereto by serving plaintiff with another demand therefor (compare, Best v. City of New York, 97 A.D.2d 389, affd 61 N.Y.2d 847)."

Summary of this case from Ramos v. New York City Housing Authority
Case details for

Ruiz v. New York City Housing Authority

Case Details

Full title:NAREIDA RUIZ, Respondent, v. NEW YORK CITY HOUSING AUTHORITY, Appellant

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

Date published: Jun 29, 1995

Citations

629 N.Y.S.2d 222 (N.Y. App. Div. 1995)
629 N.Y.S.2d 222

Citing Cases

Concepcion v. New York City Hous. Auth.

Rather, the Court held that the New York Housing Authority waived the examination when it never provided the…

Rybka v. N.Y.C. Health and Hosp

CPLR 306-a (a) separately requires that upon filing a summons and complaint, an index number shall be…