Sanchez v. Jericho Sch. Dist.

Decision Date13 February 2020
Docket Number2019–00074,2019–00572,Index No. 608702/16
Citation120 N.Y.S.3d 163,180 A.D.3d 828
Parties Brandon SANCHEZ, etc., Appellant, et al., Plaintiff, v. JERICHO SCHOOL DISTRICT, et al., Respondents.
CourtNew York Supreme Court — Appellate Division

180 A.D.3d 828
120 N.Y.S.3d 163

Brandon SANCHEZ, etc., Appellant, et al., Plaintiff,
v.
JERICHO SCHOOL DISTRICT, et al., Respondents.

2019–00074
2019–00572
Index No. 608702/16

Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Second Department, New York.

Argued November 12, 2019
February 13, 2020


120 N.Y.S.3d 164

WeitzPascale, Mineola, N.Y. (Brian C. Pascale and James M. Lane of counsel), for appellant.

Congdon, Flaherty, O'Callaghan, Reid, Donlon, Travis & Fishlinger, Uniondale, N.Y. (Christine Gasser of counsel), for respondents.

RUTH C. BALKIN, J.P., LEONARD B. AUSTIN, HECTOR D. LASALLE, ANGELA G. IANNACCI, JJ.

DECISION & ORDER

180 A.D.3d 828

In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, the plaintiff appeals from (1) an order of the Supreme Court, Nassau County (Karen V. Murphy, J.), entered November 16, 2018, and (2) a judgment of the same court entered December 12,

180 A.D.3d 829

2018. The order granted the defendants' motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint and denied the plaintiff's cross motion for leave to serve an amended complaint. The judgment, upon the order, is in favor of the defendants and against the plaintiff dismissing the complaint.

ORDERED that the appeal from the order is dismissed; and it is further,

ORDERED that the judgment is affirmed, and it is further,

ORDERED that one bill of costs is awarded to the defendants.

The appeal from the order must be dismissed because the right of direct appeal therefrom terminated with entry of the judgment in the action (see Matter of Aho, 39 N.Y.2d 241, 248, 383 N.Y.S.2d 285, 347 N.E.2d 647 ). The issues raised on the appeal from the order are brought up for review and have been considered on the appeal from the judgment (see CPLR 5501[a][1] ).

120 N.Y.S.3d 165

On January 26, 2016, the plaintiff, without leave of court, served upon the defendants a notice of claim alleging that on November 25, 2013, he was injured while participating in wrestling practice at Jericho Senior High School.

This action was commenced in November 2016. In May 2018, upon completion of discovery, the defendants moved for summary judgment dismissing the complaint, arguing, inter alia, that the plaintiff failed to serve them with a timely notice of claim. The plaintiff cross-moved for leave to serve an amended complaint. By order entered November 16, 2018, the Supreme Court granted the defendants' motion, and denied the plaintiff's cross motion. A judgment in favor of the defendants and against the plaintiff dismissing the complaint was entered on December 12, 2018. The plaintiff appeals.

Service of a notice of claim within 90 days after accrual of the claim is a condition precedent to commencing an action against a...

To continue reading

Request your trial
8 cases
  • Inc. Vill. of Freeport v. Freeport Plaza W., LLC
    • United States
    • New York Supreme Court Appellate Division
    • 8 Junio 2022
    ...equitable estoppel is to be invoked sparingly and only under exceptional circumstances" ( 206 A.D.3d 704 Sanchez v. Jericho Sch. Dist., 180 A.D.3d 828, 830, 120 N.Y.S.3d 163 [internal quotation marks omitted]). " ‘[E]stoppel against a [municipality] will lie only when the [municipality's] c......
  • Petruzzi v. Purow
    • United States
    • New York Supreme Court Appellate Division
    • 26 Febrero 2020
    ...with Abergel on September 11, 2015, required surgery thereafter, and died on September 26, 2015, and the bill of particulars asserted 120 N.Y.S.3d 163 specific allegations of negligence relating to the failure to realize and appreciate the risks associated with attempting to treat the deced......
  • Rosenthal v. Alexander
    • United States
    • New York Supreme Court Appellate Division
    • 13 Febrero 2020
    ...N.Y.S.2d 209 ).However, in opposing the motion, the plaintiffs raised triable issues of fact regarding whether the defendant's alleged 180 A.D.3d 828 negligence was a proximate cause of the decedent's injuries or death. Specifically, the plaintiffs' medical expert opined that the defendant ......
  • Inc. Vill. of Freeport v. Freeport Plaza W., LLC
    • United States
    • New York Supreme Court Appellate Division
    • 8 Junio 2022
    ..."The doctrine of equitable estoppel is to be invoked sparingly and only under exceptional circumstances" (Sanchez v Jericho Sch. Dist., 180 A.D.3d 828, 830 [internal quotation marks omitted]). "'[E]stoppel against a [municipality] will lie only when the [municipality's] conduct was calculat......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT