Legal Opinion

Sweeney v. New York City Department of Health & Mental Hygiene

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

Decided January 3, 2012PublishedCited by 3 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

*421This action is barred by the doctrine of res judicata. Plaintiffs fraud claim, based upon the same harm and arising out of the same facts presented •in a prior CPLR article 78 proceeding, could and should have been asserted in the prior proceeding (see generally Parker v Blauvelt Volunteer Fire Co., 93 NY2d 343, 347-348 [1999]; Brooklyn Welding Corp. v City of New York, 198 AD2d 189 [1993], lv dismissed 83 NY2d 795 [1994]). Further, the relief sought in this action (i.e., lost civil servant benefits) could have been claimed and awarded in the article 78 proceeding as “incidental to the…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Parker v. Blauvelt Volunteer Fire Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1999
  2. Pauk v. Board of TrusteesNew York Court of Appeals · 1986
  3. Brooklyn Welding Corp. v. City of New YorkAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1993

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. Bevilacqua v. CRP/Extell Parcel I, L.P.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2015
  2. Sweet Constructors, LLC v. Wallkill Medical Development, LLCAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2013
  3. Sweet Constructors, LLC v. Wallkill Medical Development, LLCAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2013

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API