Lopez v. City of New York, 248 A.D.2d 258 (N.Y. App. Div. 1998). · Go Syfert
Search
Lopez v. City of New York, 248 A.D.2d 258 (N.Y. App. Div. 1998). Cases Citing This Book View Copy Cite
11 citation events (5 in the last 25 years) across 2 distinct courts.
Top citers, strongest first. 3 distinct citers. How cited ↗
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Knox v. St. Luke's Hospital
N.Y. App. Div. · 2016 · confidence medium
“A fixation device cannot be transformed into a foreign object merely because the continued presence of the fixation device is inadvertent” (Newman v Keuhnelian, 248 AD2d 258, 260 [1st Dept 1998], lv denied 92 NY2d 804 [1998]; see Walton v Strong Mem.
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Walton v. Strong Memorial Hospital
N.Y. Sup. Ct. · 2012 · confidence medium
In support of this argument, defendants rely on the Appellate Division’s decision in Newman v Keuhnelian ( 248 AD2d 258, 259 [1st Dept 1998], lv denied 92 NY2d 804 [1998] [“Foley” catheter inserted for the purpose of fixing the position of the urethra is a “fixation device” because it was intentionally implanted]).
discussed Cited "see" Morales v. One Square Associates, L.P.
N.Y. App. Div. · 1998 · signal: see · confidence high
Defendants’ motion for summary judgment was properly denied as untimely because it was filed more than 120 days from the effective date of CPLR 3212 (a) (as amended by L 1996, ch 492; see, Newman v Keuhnelian, 248 AD2d 258 , lv denied 92 NY2d 804 ; Phoenix Garden Rest, v Chu, 245 AD2d 164 ), and good cause for the delay in filing the motion was not shown (see, Shmulevich v Gabbidon, 253 AD2d 756 ; Borelli v Gegaj, 248 AD2d 299 ).
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
In the Matter of Monica Lopez
v.
City of New York, and New York City Transit Authority
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York.
Mar 19, 1998.
248 A.D.2d 258
Andrias, Lerner, Nardelli, Rosenberger, Sullivan.
Cited by 1 opinion  |  Published

—Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Louis York, J.), entered October 1, 1996, which granted plaintiff’s motion for leave to serve a late notice of claim, without prejudice to defendant-appellant’s moving for “reconsideration” at the conclusion of the General Municipal Law § 50-h hearing, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

The motion was properly granted where the delay resulting from plaintiffs mistaken service of her notice of claim on the wrong public entity was short (see, Matter of Soto v New York City Hous. Auth., 180 AD2d 570), and where the section 50-h hearing might well clarify the location and nature of the alleged defect in the subway station pavement that caused plaintiff to fall, and the prejudice, if any, to defendant caused by the delay in supplying needed information (see, D’Alessandro v New York City Tr. Auth., 83 NY2d 891; Mayer v DuPont Assocs., 80 AD2d 799).

Concur — Lerner, P. J., Sullivan, Rosenberger, Nardelli and Andrias, JJ.