Ramos v City of New York

Annotate this Case

Download PDF

Ramos v City of New York 2022 NY Slip Op 33105(U) September 12, 2022 Supreme Court, New York County Docket Number: Index No. 160624/2020 Judge: Leslie A. Stroth Cases posted with a "30000" identifier, i.e., 2013 NY Slip Op 30001(U), are republished from various New York State and local government sources, including the New York State Unified Court System's eCourts Service. This opinion is uncorrected and not selected for official publication. INDEX NO. 160624/2020 FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 09/15/2022 11:40 AM NYSCEF DOC. NO. 38 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 09/15/2022 SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK NEW YORK COUNTY PRESENT: 52 PART HON. LESLIE A. STROTH Justice ----------' -----------X LIZZETTE RAMOS, INDEX NO. MOTION DATE Plaintiff, 160624/2020 06/07/2022 001 MOTION SEQ. NO. - V - DECISION + ORDER ON MOTION CITY OF NEW YORK, DYC CORP., Defendant. ---------------------------------·---- ------------------X Third-Party Index No. 595006/2022 DYC CORP. Plaintiff, -against\ PEE DEE STEAK INC., YOUNG FISH 110 MARKET INC. Defendant. ---------------------------------------------·---- ·---X The following e-filed documents, listed by NYSCEF document number (Motion 001) 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 were read on this motion to/for AMEND CAPTION/PLEADINGS This personal injury action arises from an alleged trip and fall accident on August 18, 2020, on a sidewalk in front of 2006 Third A venue, New York, New York, which abuts property purportedly owned by defendant DYC Corp. (DYC). DYC commenced a third-party action against commercial tenants in its building. Third-party defendant "Pee Dee Steak Inc." did not interpose an answer. Further investigation by DYC revealed the correct corporate name of "Pee Dee Steak Inc." is "2006 Pee Dee Steak Inc_;, DYC, as third-party plaintiff, now moves to amend the caption to correct the name of the first named third-party defendant from "Pee Dee Steak Inc" to "2006 Pee Dee Steak Inc." 160624/2020 RAMOS, LIZZETTE vs. CITY OF NEW YORK Motion No. 001 \ [* 1] 1 of 4 Page 1 of 4 INDEX NO. 160624/2020 FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 09/15/2022 11:40 AM NYSCEF DOC. NO. 38 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 09/15/2022 DYC argues that no prejudice will be suffered by any party hereto if this request is granted, because no preliminary confer~nce has yet been held, and no depositions have been conducted, The Court notes that DYC previo~sly filed an amended third-party complaint which· changed the name of "Pee Dee Steak Inc." to "2006 Pee Dee Steak Inc." (See NYSCEF doc. no. 34). Third-party defendant Young Fish 110-Market, Inc. (Fish) interposed a third-party answer to the amended third-party complaint. (See NYSCEF doc.- no. 23), which includes cross-claims against "2006 Pee Dee Steak Inc." However, the Court subsequently rejected the amended thirdparty complaint, because a change ofp~ies requires a court order. The_instant motion ensued. Third-party defendant Fish partially opposes the motion, to the extent that" it attempts to streamline potential procedural iss~es here. Fish requests that the Court consider DYC's motion as one to re-file its amended third-party complaint, rather than for leave to amend the caption. Fish also requests that this Court allow its answer to the improperly filed amended third-party complaint to stand, without re-filing. As granting Fish's request may only further complicate the matter, the ' Court denies Fish's request. Given that the improperly filed third-party complaint was rejected, the Court deems Fish's attempted amended answer a nullity. However, Fish does not oppose the ultimate. relief requested, replacing "Pee Dee Steak Inc." with "2006 Pee Dee Steak Inc," nor do any other parties oppose the motion. As. leave to amend the pleadings shall be freely given, DYC's rp.otion to amend the third-party complaint to include the correct entity is granted. See CPLR 3025. Fish inust re-file its responsive papers to the amended-third party complaint following service of same, as is the normal course and as permitted by the herein ord~r. Accordingly, it is . [* 2] 160624/2020 RAMOS, LIZZETTE vs. CITY OF NEW YORK Motion No. 001 2 of 4 Page2 of4 FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 09/15/2022 11:40 AM NYSCEF DOC. NO. 38 INDEX NO. 160624/2020 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 09/15/2022 ORDERED that the third-party plaintiff's motion for leave to amend the third-party complaint is granted; and it is further · ORDERED that the amended third-party complaint, in the form annexed to the motion papers, shall be deemed served upon service of a C(?PY of this order with notice of entry upon all parties who have appeared in the action; and it is further ORDERED th_at a s~pplemental summons and amended third-party complaint, in the form annexed to the motion papers, shall be served, in accordance with the Civil Practice Law and Rules, upon the additional parties in this action within 30 days after service of a copy·of this order with notice of entry; and it is further ORDERED that the action shall bear the following caption: X------ ---------------------------------------------------------LIZETTE RAMOS, Plaintiff, -against-_ CITY OF NEW YORK and DYC CORP., Defendant(s). X----- -----------. -- .--------------------------------------- .______ _ DYC CORP., Plaintiff, -against2006'PEE DEE STEAK INC. and YOUNG FISH 110 MARKET INC., Defendants. X------------------------------------------------------------------\. 160624/2020 RAMOS, LIZZETTE vs. CITY OF NEWVORK Motion No. 001 · [* 3] 3 of 4 Page 3 of4 INDEX NO. 160624/2020 FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 09/15/2022 11:40 AM NYSCEF DOC. NO. 38 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 09/15/2022 and it is further· ORDERED that counsel for the moving party shall serve a copy of this order with notice of entry upon .the County Clerk (60 Cei:itre Street, Room 141B) and the Clerk of the General Clerk's Office (60 Centre Street, Room 119), who are directed to mark the court's records to reflect the parties being added pursuant hereto; and it is further ORDERED that such service upon the County Clerk and the Clerk of the General Clerk's Office shall be made in accordance with the proce.dures set forth in the Protocol on Courthouse and County Clerk Procedures.for Electrorzically Filed Cases (accessible at the "E-Filing" page on the court's website at the address (www.nycourts.gov/supctmanh). This constitutes the decision and order of the Court. 9/12/2022 DATE CHECKONE:. CASE .DISPOSED .GRANTED • NO DENIED GRANTED IN PART APPLICATION: SETTLE ORDER SUBMIT ORDER CHECK IF APPROPRIATE: INCLUDES ·TRANSFER/REASSIGN FIDUCIARY APPOINTMENT • • OTHER REFERENCE. Page4of 4 160624/2020 RAMOS, LIZZETTE vs. CITY OF NEW YORK Motion No. 001 [* 4] AL DISPOSITION 4 of 4

Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.