Legal Opinion
Miller v. City of New York
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
Decided November 22, 2011PublishedCited by 4 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
A notice of claim is required as a condition precedent to commencing an action against an employee of the New York City Department of Education (Education Law § 3813 [2]; General Municipal Law § 50-i), when, as in this case, the conduct complained of was engaged in as part of defendant’s employment or in the scope of her employment (Radvany v Jones, 184 AD2d 349 [1992]; see also Hale v Scopac, 74 AD3d 1906 [2010]; DeRise v Kreinik, 10 AD3d 381, 382 [2004]). Here, plaintiff did file a notice of claim which described in detail the time, place and manner of the conduct by Livanis that allegedly…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- Parochial Bus Systems, Inc. v. Board of EducationNew York Court of Appeals · 1983
- DeLeonibus v. ScognamilloAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1992
- Simons v. City of New YorkAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1998
- DeRise v. KreinikAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2004
- Hale v. ScopacAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2010
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by4 opinions
- Se Dae Yang v. New York City Health & Hosps. Corp.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2016
- Kassapian v. City of New YorkAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2017
- Vaynshelbaum v. City of New YorkAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2016
- Mirro v. City of New YorkAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2018