City of New York v. Candelario

Full title: CITY OF NEW YORK, Respondent-Appellant, v. ANA CANDELARIO, Sued Herein as…

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

Date published: Jan 22, 1996

223 A.D.2d 617 (N.Y. App. Div. 1996)

637 N.Y.S.2d 311

Opinion

January 22, 1996

Appeal from the Civil Court of the City of New York, Kings County (Johnson, J.).

Ordered that the order of the Appellate Term is affirmed insofar as appealed from, without costs or disbursements; and it is further,

Ordered that the order of the Appellate Term is reversed insofar as cross-appealed from, on the law, without costs or disbursements, and the counterclaim for injunctive relief is severed from the summary proceeding.

We agree with the Appellate Term that Ana Candelario's counterclaims for damages should be dismissed because of her failure to comply with the notice of claim provisions contained in the Administrative Code of the City of New York § 7-201 (see, City of New York v Kashau, 133 A.D.2d 205; City of New York v Wall St. Racquet Club, 136 Misc.2d 405). However, Candelario's counterclaim for injunctive relief has no bearing on the outcome of this summary eviction proceeding and, therefore, should have been severed from the proceeding (see, CPLR 407). Rosenblatt, J.P., Copertino, Freidmann and Krausman, JJ., concur.