From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Plotkin v. New York City Transit Authority

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Oct 23, 1995
220 A.D.2d 653 (N.Y. App. Div. 1995)

Opinion

October 23, 1995

Appeal from the Supreme Court, Kings County (Bernstein, J.).


Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs.

Inasmuch as the summons and complaint were timely served, this action cannot be considered a nullity merely because the original plaintiff lacked the capacity to sue (see, Carrick v. Central Gen. Hosp., 51 N.Y.2d 242, 249; Seidensticker v. Huntington Hosp., 194 A.D.2d 718). Although the defendant maintains that the subsequent order substituting the Public Administrator as plaintiff was obtained by fraud, we agree with the Supreme Court that the record does not support this contention. Because the defect in capacity was cured prior to the defendant's motion to dismiss, the motion was properly denied (see, Seidensticker v Huntington Hosp., supra; Snay v. Cohoes Mem. Hosp., 110 A.D.2d 1021, 1022). Sullivan, J.P., Miller, Copertino and Goldstein, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

Plotkin v. New York City Transit Authority

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Oct 23, 1995
220 A.D.2d 653 (N.Y. App. Div. 1995)
Case details for

Plotkin v. New York City Transit Authority

Case Details

Full title:SAMUEL PLOTKIN, Public Administrator of Kings County, as Administrator of…

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

Date published: Oct 23, 1995

Citations

220 A.D.2d 653 (N.Y. App. Div. 1995)
632 N.Y.S.2d 979

Citing Cases

D'Angelo v. Kujawski

"Whether to grant such leave is within the ... court's discretion, the exercise of which will not be lightly…

Rothstein v. Dewitt Rehab. & Nursing Ctr.

It is well established that a proposed administrator lacks capacity to commence an action on behalf of a…