It is undisputed that Reyes and Jean filed a complaint naming only New York City Department of Parks and Recreation (Parks), which it served only on Parks. Movants contend that they should be permitted to amend the summons and complaint to add the City as a defendant because Parks was a misnomer. However, the misnomer exception is inapplicable because the proper party, the City, was not served (see National Refund & Util. Servs., Inc. v Plummer Realty Corp.,
Welcome to the leading source of independent legal reporting
Let's get started
Sign on now to see your case.
Or view more than 10 million decisions and orders.
GIL v. CITY OF NEW YORK
Motion No. M-3305.
143 A.D.3d 572 (2016)
2016 NY Slip Op 06879
LEANDRO GIL, Plaintiff, and PEDRO REYES et al., Appellants, v. CITY OF NEW YORK et al., Respondents.
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department.https://leagle.com/images/logo.png
Decided October 20, 2016.
Decided October 20, 2016.
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department.
Listed below are the cases that are cited in this Featured Case. Click the citation to see the full text of the cited case. Citations are also linked in the body of the Featured Case.
Cited Cases
- No Cases Found
Listed below are those cases in which this Featured Case is cited. Click on the case name to see the full text of the citing case.
