Cases

Scott v City of New York (2024 NY Slip Op 06138) Scott v City of New York 2024 NY Slip Op 06138 Decided on December 05, 2024 Appellate Division, First Department Published by New York State Law Reporting Bureau pursuant to Judiciary Law § 4

The plaintiff allegedly sustained personal injuries on the morning of October 26, 2002, when the car in which he was riding allegedly drove into a pothole in the roadway of McDonald Avenue in Brooklyn, causing the car’s driver to lose control of *986the vehicle and the car to collide with a pillar which supported the overhead tracks of the elevated “F” subway line. The plaintiff subsequently comme

643 F.3d 56 (2011) Keenan SCOTT, et al., Plaintiffs-Appellee-Cross-Appellant, v. CITY OF NEW YORK, Defendant-Appellant-Cross-Appellee. Docket Nos. 09-3943-cv (L), 09-5232-cv (XAP). United States Court of Appeals, Second Circuit. Argued: October 26, 2010. Decided: May 24, 2011. *57 Thomas P. Puccio, The Law Office

PER CURIAM: This case returns to us following our remand of it to the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York (Scheindlin, J.) in December of last year. See Scott v. City of New York, 626 F.3d 130 (2d Cir.2010) (per curiam). In that decision, we considered to what extent, if at all, our rule announced almost three decades ago in New York State Ass’n for Retarded Children v. Care

626 F.3d 130 (2010) Keenan SCOTT, et al., Plaintiffs-Appellee-Cross-Appellant, v. CITY OF NEW YORK, Defendant-Appellant-Cross-Appellee. Docket Nos. 09-3943-cv (L), 09-5232-cv (XAP). United States Court of Appeals, Second Circuit. Argued: October 26, 2010. Decided: December 1, 2010. Thomas P. Puccio, The Law Offices of Thomas P. Puccio, New York, NY,

629 F.Supp.2d 266 (2009) Keenan M. SCOTT, et al., Plaintiffs, v. CITY OF NEW YORK and the New York City Police Department, Defendants. No. 02 Civ. 9530 (SAS). United States District Court, S.D. New York. May 8, 2009. *267 Thomas P. Puccio, Esq., Law Offices of Thomas P. Puccio, New York, NY, Gary A. Orseck, Esq., Lawrence S. Robb

604 F.Supp.2d 602 (2009) Keenan M. SCOTT, et al., Plaintiffs, v. CITY OF NEW YORK and The New York City Police Department, Defendants. No. 02 Civ. 9530(SAS). United States District Court, S.D. New York. February 27, 2009. *603 Thomas P. Puccio, Esq., Law Offices of Thomas P. Puccio, New York, NY, Will Aitchison, Esq., Mark A. Cra

592 F.Supp.2d 475 (2008) Keenan M. SCOTT, et al., Plaintiffs, v. CITY OF NEW YORK and The New York City Police Department, Defendants. No. 02 Civ. 9530 (SAS). United States District Court, S.D. New York. November 10, 2008. Order Granting Reconsideration in Part November 13, 2008. *478 Thomas P. Puccio, Esq., Law

591 F.Supp.2d 554 (2008) Keenan M. SCOTT, et al., Plaintiffs, v. CITY OF NEW YORK and The New York City Police Department, Defendants. No. 02 Civ. 9530(SAS). United States District Court, S.D. New York. October 27, 2008. *556 Thomas P. Puccio, Esq., Law Offices of Thomas P. Puccio, New York, NY, Will Aitchison, Esq., Mark A. Crab

592 F.Supp.2d 501 (2008) Keenan M. SCOTT, et al., Plaintiffs, v. CITY OF NEW YORK and the New York City Police Department, Defendants. No. 02 Civ. 9530(SAS). United States District Court, S.D. New York. November 24, 2008. *503 Thomas P. Puccio, Esq., Law Offices of Thomas P. Puccio, New York, NY, Will Aitchison, Esq., Mark A. Cra

592 F.Supp.2d 386 (2008) Keenan M. SCOTT, et al., Plaintiffs, v. CITY OF NEW YORK and the New York City Police Department, Defendants. No. 02 Civ. 9530(SAS). United States District Court, S.D. New York. August 28, 2008. *391 Thomas P. Puccio, Esq., Law Offices of Thomas P. Puccio, New York, NY, Gary A. Orseck, Esq., Lawrence S. R

Order, Supreme Court, Bronx County (Paul Victor, J.), entered December 27, 2005, which, to the extent appealed from, as limited by the briefs, denied defendants’ cross motion to dismiss plaintiff’s claims for false arrest and malicious prosecution, unanimously reversed, on the law, without costs, the motion granted and the false arrest and malicious prosecution claims dismissed. On May 22, 2001, plaintiff was involved in an altercation

In an action, inter alia, to recover damages for wrongful death, etc., the defendant City of New York appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Flug, J.), dated June 12, 2003, which denied its motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint and all cross claims insofar as asserted against it. Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs to the plaintiff-respondent. The plaintiffs decedent was

340 F.Supp.2d 371 (2004) Keenan M. SCOTT, Thomas Logan, John Loomis, Robert Davidson, and Michael C. Demartino, et al., Plaintiffs, v. CITY OF NEW YORK and The New York City Police Department, Defendants. No. 02 Civ. 9530(SAS). United States District Court, S.D. New York. June 23, 2004. *373 Thomas P. Puccio, Law Offices of Thoma

641 F.Supp.2d 211 (2009) Collette J. SCOTT, Plaintiff, v. CITY OF NEW YORK DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTION, Correction Officers' Benevolent Association of the City of New York, Inc, and Norman Seabrook, Defendants. No. 04 Civ. 9638(SHS). United States District Court, S.D. New York. June 17, 2009. *216 Donnahue G. George, Law Offices of

OPINION OF THE COURT David I. Schmidt, J. Plaintiff moves for an order pursuant to CPLR 4404 setting aside that portion of the jury’s verdict that reduced plaintiffs award by 60% in accordance with an interrogatory that had been propounded to the jury over his objection. Plaintiff commenced this action for false arrest against the defendant, the City of New York (City).

Scott v New York City Hous. Auth. (2019 NY Slip Op 07689) Scott v New York City Hous. Auth. 2019 NY Slip Op 07689 Decided on October 24, 2019 Appellate Division, First Department Published by New York State Law Reportin

OPINION OF THE COURT Francesca E. Connolly, J. The plaintiff commenced this action to recover damages for personal injuries she allegedly sustained on June 15, 2011 when the City of New Rochelle’s police officers searched her home. The defendants move for summary judgment dismissing the complaint in its entirety. Factual Background/Procedural History The Notice of Claim

JOHN G. KOELTL, District Judge: This is a case about unconstitutional conditions of confinement for pretrial detainees. Twenty state pretrial detainees (“the plaintiffs”) 1 arrested on separate dates between July 10, 2011, and July 23, 2013, brought individual § 1983 claims in

DECISION AND ORDER WILLIAM F. KUNTZ, II, District Judge: Plaintiffs Germain Cano, Eric Cephus, Kevin Darnell, Michael Glenn, Deborah Gonzalez, Travis Gordon, Jacqueline Guarino, Keith Jennings, Wesley Jones, Gregory Maugeri, Michael McGhee, Dmitriy Miloslavskiy, Yvonne Ming, Steven Modes, Kerry Scott, Phillip Singleton, Michael Spalango, Raymond Tucker, Nancy Viglione, and Elli Vikki (collectiv