Peralta v City of New York

Peralta v City of New York 2012 NY Slip Op 01336 Decided on February 21, 2012 Appellate Division, First Department Published by New York State Law Reporting Bureau pursuant to Judiciary Law § 431. This opinion is uncorrected and subject to revision before publication in the Official Reports.

Decided on February 21, 2012
Andrias, J.P., Saxe, Acosta, Freedman, Richter, JJ. 6854-
310518/08 6855

[*1]Daniel Peralta, et al., Plaintiffs-Respondents,

v

The City of New York, Defendant-Appellant, P.O. Maurice Harrington, etc., et al., Defendants.




Michael A. Cardozo, Corporation Counsel, New York (Jane L.
Gordon of counsel), for appellant.
Burns & Harris, New York (Blake G. Goldfarb of counsel), for
respondents.

Appeal from order, Supreme Court, Bronx County (Larry S. Schachner, J.), entered June 22, 2010, which, to the extent appealed from as limited by the briefs, denied the motion of defendant City of New York to dismiss plaintiffs' claim pursuant to 42 USC § 1983, unanimously dismissed, without costs, as untimely.

In its motion papers for reargument of the order denying its motion to dismiss, the City included a copy of the order appealed from, stamped with the date of its entry, and an affirmation by an attorney in support of the motion which referred to the enclosed order. This was sufficient to trigger the 30-day period to take an appeal for both parties (CPLR 5513[a]; see Norstar Bank of Upstate NY v Office Control Sys., 78 NY2d 1110 [1991]; Matter of Xander Corp. v Haberman, 41 AD3d 489, 490 [2007]; compare Matter of Reynolds v Dustman, 1 NY3d 559 [2003]).

THIS CONSTITUTES THE DECISION AND ORDER
OF THE SUPREME COURT, APPELLATE DIVISION, FIRST DEPARTMENT.

ENTERED: FEBRUARY 21, 2012

CLERK