From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Poje v. Hopkins

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Third Department
Oct 31, 2002
298 A.D.2d 780 (N.Y. App. Div. 2002)

Opinion

90493

Decided and Entered: October 31, 2002.

Appeal from an order of the Supreme Court (Kane, J.), entered June 15, 2001 in Sullivan County, which, inter alia, granted defendants' motions to dismiss the complaint as time barred.

Frank Poje, Swan Lake, appellant pro se.

Gellert Quartararo P.C., Poughkeepsie (James M. Fedorchak of counsel), for John Hopkins and others, respondents.

Before: Crew III, J.P., Spain, Mugglin, Rose and Lahtinen, JJ.


MEMORANDUM AND ORDER


Plaintiff was arrested in December 1997 for a number of Vehicle and Traffic Law violations and jailed for three days before he posted bail. Eventually, he was indicted for two counts of felony driving while intoxicated and four traffic infractions. He was convicted in October 1998 of one count of driving while intoxicated (Vehicle and Traffic Law § 1192) and sentenced to a definite sentence of 11 months. Plaintiff was released from incarceration in May 1999. On March 16, 2000, this Court affirmed plaintiff's underlying conviction (People v. Poje, 270 A.D.2d 649, lv denied 95 N.Y.2d 802).

Plaintiff commenced this action for false arrest, false imprisonment and malicious prosecution by the filing of a summons and complaint in April 2001. Prior to answering the complaint, defendants successfully moved for dismissal of the complaint on the ground, inter alia, that the action was time barred. An action to recover damages for false imprisonment and malicious prosecution must be commenced within one year from the date those actions accrue (see CPLR 215). Under any possible interpretation of the facts stated above, it is clear that plaintiff commenced this action after the limitation period had expired and it was properly dismissed by Supreme Court (see CPLR 3211 [a] [5]).

We view causes of action for false imprisonment and false arrest as indistinguishable from one another (see Brown v. Roland, 215 A.D.2d 1000,lv dismissed 87 N.Y.2d 861).

Crew III, J.P., Spain, Mugglin and Rose, JJ., concur.

ORDERED that the order is affirmed, with costs.


Summaries of

Poje v. Hopkins

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Third Department
Oct 31, 2002
298 A.D.2d 780 (N.Y. App. Div. 2002)
Case details for

Poje v. Hopkins

Case Details

Full title:FRANK POJE, Appellant, v. JOHN HOPKINS et al., Respondents

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

Date published: Oct 31, 2002

Citations

298 A.D.2d 780 (N.Y. App. Div. 2002)
748 N.Y.S.2d 714

Citing Cases

Prophet v. Nassau County Police Department

A cause of action for false arrest has been described as essentially the same tort as false imprisonment.…

Fielden v. City of N.Y.

A cause of action alleging false arrest is indistinguishable from one asserting false imprisonment. See 59 NY…