From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Rodriguez v. City of New York

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
Apr 22, 2021
193 A.D.3d 603 (N.Y. App. Div. 2021)

Opinion

13662 Index No. 28675/18 Case No. 2019-5301

04-22-2021

Hector RODRIGUEZ et al., Plaintiffs–Appellants, v. The CITY OF NEW YORK et al., Defendants–Respondents.

Akin Law Group PLLC, New York (Leopold Raic and Robert D. Salaman of counsel), for appellants. James E. Johnson, Corporation Counsel, New York (Claibourne Henry of counsel), for respondents.


Akin Law Group PLLC, New York (Leopold Raic and Robert D. Salaman of counsel), for appellants.

James E. Johnson, Corporation Counsel, New York (Claibourne Henry of counsel), for respondents.

Acosta, P.J., Renwick, Singh, Moulton, JJ.

Order, Supreme Court, Bronx County (Mitchell J. Danziger, J.), entered May 2, 2019, which, to the extent appealed from as limited by the briefs, granted defendants' motion to dismiss the complaint as against the New York City Department of Education (DOE) due to plaintiffs' failure to file a timely notice of claim as required by Education Law § 3813(1), unanimously affirmed, without costs.

It is undisputed that plaintiffs failed to file or serve a timely notice of claim with defendant DOE pursuant to Education Law § 3813(1). Thus, their claims of discrimination against the DOE were properly dismissed (see Laboy v. City of New York, 159 A.D.3d 632, 633, 74 N.Y.S.3d 524 [1st Dept. 2018], lv denied 33 N.Y.3d 904, 2019 WL 2042035 [2019] ; see also Parochial Bus Sys., Inc. v. Board of Educ. of City of N.Y., 60 N.Y.2d 539, 470 N.Y.S.2d 564, 458 N.E.2d 1241 [1983] ). The individual defendants' positions as school cooks, rather than officers, is irrelevant to the issue of whether the DOE is subject to the notice of claim requirement.

This Court declines to consider plaintiffs' argument, raised improperly for the first time in their reply brief on appeal, that under Margerum v. City of Buffalo, 24 N.Y.3d 721, 5 N.Y.S.3d 336, 28 N.E.3d 515 (2015), no notice of claim is required where the complaint alleges violations of the State and City Human Rights Laws. In any event, where a notice of claim is required under Education Law § 3813(1), reliance on Margerum and its progeny is misplaced (see Seifullah v. City of New York, 161 A.D.3d 1206, 74 N.Y.S.3d 506 [2d Dept. 2018] ; Laboy, 159 A.D.3d 632, 633, 74 N.Y.S.3d 524 ).


Summaries of

Rodriguez v. City of New York

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
Apr 22, 2021
193 A.D.3d 603 (N.Y. App. Div. 2021)
Case details for

Rodriguez v. City of New York

Case Details

Full title:Hector Rodriguez et al., Plaintiffs-Appellants, v. The City of New York et…

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

Date published: Apr 22, 2021

Citations

193 A.D.3d 603 (N.Y. App. Div. 2021)
193 A.D.3d 603
2021 N.Y. Slip Op. 2477

Citing Cases

Stewart v. City of Mount Vernon

SeifullahvCity of New York, 161 A.D.3d 1206 (2nd Dept. 2018); Shahidv City of New York, 50 A.D.3d 770 (2nd…

Lebowitz v. N.Y.C. Dep't of Educ.

In view of this statutory language, a notice of claim must be served with respect to a City HRL claims…