Learn About the Law
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
Brent HERRY, appellant, v. CITY OF NEW YORK, et al., defendants, New York City Housing Authority, respondent (and a third-party action).
DECISION & ORDER
In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, the plaintiff appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Kevin J. Kerrigan, J.), entered August 29, 2022. The order, insofar as appealed from, granted that branch of the motion of the defendant New York City Housing Authority which was to dismiss the complaint insofar as asserted against it.
ORDERED that the order is reversed insofar as appealed from, on the law, with costs, and that branch of the motion of the defendant New York City Housing Authority which was to dismiss the complaint insofar as asserted against it is denied.
The underlying facts of this action are recited in this Court's decision and order on a related appeal (see Matter of Herry v. New York City Hous. Auth., ––– A.D.3d ––––, ––– N.Y.S.3d ––––, 2025 WL 979831 [decided herewith]). The plaintiff commenced this personal injury action against, among others, the defendant New York City Housing Authority (hereinafter NYCHA). NYCHA moved, inter alia, to dismiss the complaint insofar as asserted against it on the ground that the plaintiff failed to serve a timely notice of claim upon it. In an order entered August 29, 2022, the Supreme Court, among other things, granted that branch of NYCHA's motion. The plaintiff appeals.
The Supreme Court's determination in this action rested on the court's determination in a related proceeding commenced by the plaintiff to deny that branch of the petition which was to serve a late notice of claim upon NYCHA. As this Court has reversed that determination in the related proceeding and granted the plaintiff leave to serve a late notice of claim upon NYCHA (see id.), we likewise reverse the order insofar as appealed from and deny that branch of NYCHA's motion which was to dismiss the complaint insofar as asserted against it on the ground that the plaintiff failed to serve a timely notice of claim upon it.
BARROS, J.P., FORD, LOVE and HOM, JJ., concur.
Thank you for your feedback!
A free source of state and federal court opinions, state laws, and the United States Code. For more information about the legal concepts addressed by these cases and statutes visit FindLaw's Learn About the Law.
Docket No: 2022-08271
Decided: April 02, 2025
Court: Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Second Department, New York.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)
Harness the power of our directory with your own profile. Select the button below to sign up.
Learn more about FindLaw’s newsletters, including our terms of use and privacy policy.
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)