From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Laboy v. City of N.Y.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
Mar 29, 2018
159 A.D.3d 632 (N.Y. App. Div. 2018)

Opinion

6120 Index 17190/99

03-29-2018

George LABOY, as Executor of the Estate of Carmen Figueroa, Plaintiff–Appellant, v. CITY OF NEW YORK, et al., Defendants–Respondents.

The Law Office of Maury B. Josephson, P.C., Uniondale (Maury B. Josephson of counsel), for appellant. Zachary W. Carter, Corporation Counsel, New York (Susan Paulson of counsel), for respondents.


The Law Office of Maury B. Josephson, P.C., Uniondale (Maury B. Josephson of counsel), for appellant.

Zachary W. Carter, Corporation Counsel, New York (Susan Paulson of counsel), for respondents.

Friedman, J.P., Tom, Kapnick, Singh, JJ.

Order, Supreme Court, Bronx County (Eddie J. McShan, J.), entered September 19, 2016, which, in this employment discrimination action, granted defendants' motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

The failure of plaintiff's decedent to file any notice of the discrimination claims which are asserted in this action was fatal to the claims against defendants (see Education Law § 3813[1] ). Defendants did not waive this defense, as they raised it before the court of original jurisdiction (see Flanagan v Board of Educ., Commack Union Free School Dist., 47 N.Y.2d 613, 617, 419 N.Y.S.2d 917, 393 N.E.2d 991 [1979] ; Robinson v Board of Educ. of City Sch. Dist. of City of N.Y., 104 A.D.3d 666, 667, 962 N.Y.S.2d 279 [2d Dept. 2013] ), and plaintiff's contention that the cursory form notice of administrative appeal from the unsatisfactory rating on the decedent's annual performance evaluation for the 1995–1996 school year satisfied the Education Law's notice of claim requirement, is unavailing. The notice of administrative appeal informed defendants only that the decedent was appealing the unsatisfactory rating and gave no notice of her claims that she was discriminated against (see Parochial Bus Sys. v Board of Educ. of City of N.Y., 60 N.Y.2d 539, 547, 470 N.Y.S.2d 564, 458 N.E.2d 1241 [1983] ; Gastman v Department of Educ. of City of N.Y., 60 A.D.3d 444, 874 N.Y.S.2d 459 [1st Dept. 2009], lv denied 12 N.Y.3d 711, 882 N.Y.S.2d 397, 909 N.E.2d 1235 [2009] ).

It is further noted that the action was untimely. The decedent received her unsatisfactory rating in 1996 and the action was not commenced until 1999, well beyond the applicable one-year statute of limitations (see Stembridge v. New York Dept. of Educ., 88 A.D.3d 611, 931 N.Y.S.2d 72 [1st Dept. 2011], lv denied 19 N.Y.3d 802, 946 N.Y.S.2d 105, 969 N.E.2d 222 [2012] ; Education Law § 3813[2–b] ).


Summaries of

Laboy v. City of N.Y.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
Mar 29, 2018
159 A.D.3d 632 (N.Y. App. Div. 2018)
Case details for

Laboy v. City of N.Y.

Case Details

Full title:George Laboy, As Executor of the Estate of Carmen Figueroa…

Court:Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York

Date published: Mar 29, 2018

Citations

159 A.D.3d 632 (N.Y. App. Div. 2018)
159 A.D.3d 632
2018 N.Y. Slip Op. 2244

Citing Cases

Rodriguez v. City of New York

It is undisputed that plaintiffs failed to file or serve a timely notice of claim with defendant DOE pursuant…

Ulffe v. The City of New York

As such, Plaintiffs age discrimination claims under SHRL and CHRL against the DOE are time-barred. See…