Hargraves v. Bath Central School District

5 Citing cases

  1. Krohn v. New York City Police Dept

    341 F.3d 177 (2d Cir. 2003)   Cited 27 times   2 Legal Analyses
    Noting that a party timely filed for reconsideration under Fed R. Civ. P. 59(e)

    See, e.g., Clark-Fitzpatrick, Inc. v. Long Island R.R. Co., 70 N.Y.2d 382, 388, 516 N.E.2d 190, 192-93, 521 N.Y.S.2d 653, 655-56 (1987); Sharapata, 56 N.Y.2d at 336, 437 N.E.2d at 1106, 452 N.Y.S.2d at 349. Further, while New York's lower courts generally assume that no punitive damages will lie against a municipality or its agencies, see, e.g., Karoon v. New York City Transit Auth., 241 A.D.2d 323, 659 N.Y.S.2d 27 (1st Dep't 1997); Hargraves v. Bath Cent. Sch. Dist., 237 A.D.2d 977, 654 N.Y.S.2d 539 (4th Dep't 1997), one city court has permitted the imposition of punitive damages against a city agency, apparently assuming that the NYCHRL authorized punitive damages against city agencies to the same extent as against private defendants. See Grullon v. South Bronx Overall Econ. Dev. Corp., 185 Misc.2d 645, 712 N.Y.S.2d 911 (N.Y.City Civ.Ct. 2000). Where there is no definitive state court authority on an issue, and the lower state courts are split in their approach, certification of the question to the state's highest court is appropriate.

  2. Dixon v. William Floyd Union Free Sch. Dist.

    136 A.D.3d 972 (N.Y. App. Div. 2016)   Cited 27 times

    Accordingly, the Supreme Court should have granted that branch of the District's motion which was for summary judgment dismissing the cause of action alleging negligent supervision. Further, the Supreme Court should have dismissed the fourth cause of action, which demanded punitive damages, since punitive damages are not available against the District, as it is a public corporation (see Krohn v New York City Police Dept., 2 NY3d 329; Hargraves v Bath Cent. School Dist., 237 AD2d 977, 978). Moreover, New York State does not recognize an independent cause of action to recover punitive damages (see Stein v Doukas, 98 AD3d 1024,1026).

  3. Trusievitz v. Bath Central School District

    237 A.D.2d 978 (N.Y. App. Div. 1997)

    Present — Pine, J.P., Lawton, Callahan, Doerr and Fallon, JJ. Order unanimously modified on the law and as modified affirmed without costs in accordance with the same Memorandum as in Hargraves v Bath Cent. School Dist. ( 237 AD2d 977 [decided herewith]). (Appeal from Order of Supreme Court, Steuben County, Purple, Jr., J. — Summary Judgment.)

  4. McVawcd-Doe v. Columbus Ave. Elementary Sch.

    2020 N.Y. Slip Op. 34559 (N.Y. Sup. Ct. 2020)   Cited 1 times

    School Districts are public corporations and punitive damages cannot be assessed against them. See, Dixon v. William Floyd Union Free School District, 136 A.D.3d 972, 973 (2nd Dept 2016); and Hargraves v. Bath Central School District, 237 A.D.2d 977, 978 (4th Dept 1997). Any claim for punitive damages against Defendants is therefore dismissed.

  5. Torrey v. Portville Cent. Sch.

    66 Misc. 3d 1225 (N.Y. Sup. Ct. 2020)   Cited 31 times

    School Districts are public corporations and punitive damages cannot be assessed against them. (See , Dixon v. William Floyd Union Free School District , 136 AD3d 972, 973 [2nd Dept 2016] ; and Hargraves v. Bath Central School District , 237 AD2d 977, 978 [4th Dept 1997] ). Any claim for punitive damages against defendant Portville is therefore dismissed.