From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Bailey v. City of N.Y

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Oct 23, 2008
55 A.D.3d 426 (N.Y. App. Div. 2008)

Opinion

No. 4360.

October 23, 2008.

Order, Supreme Court, Bronx County (Faul Victor, J.), entered on or about August 22, 2007, which, insofar as appealed from as limited by the briefs, granted defendant City of New York's cross motion to dismiss the complaint, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

Alexander J. Wulwick, New York, for appellant.

Michael A. Cardozo, Corporation Counsel, New York (Drake A. Colley of counsel), for respondent.

Before: Lippman, P.J., Andrias, Saxe, Sweeny and DeGrasse, JJ.


Dismissal of the complaint was appropriate, since the City is not a proper party to this action where plaintiff sustained injuries as a result of tripping and falling on public school grounds. Although the 2002 amendments to the Education Law (L 2002, ch 91) provide for greater mayoral control over education in the City and limit the powers of the Department/Board of Education, they do not establish a basis to hold the City liable for the personal injuries sustained by plaintiff ( see Perez v City of New York, 41 AD3d 378, lv denied 10 NY3d 708).


Summaries of

Bailey v. City of N.Y

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Oct 23, 2008
55 A.D.3d 426 (N.Y. App. Div. 2008)
Case details for

Bailey v. City of N.Y

Case Details

Full title:JUNE BAILEY, Appellant, v. CITY OF NEW YORK, Respondent

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

Date published: Oct 23, 2008

Citations

55 A.D.3d 426 (N.Y. App. Div. 2008)
2008 N.Y. Slip Op. 8003
866 N.Y.S.2d 66

Citing Cases

Smith v. City of New York

Respondents argue under their third defense in their answer that the City of New York is not a proper party…

Myers v. City of New York

Ordered that the order is affirmed insofar as appealed from, with costs. The Supreme Court properly granted…