From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

J.D. v. The Archdiocese of N.Y.

Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Mar 23, 2023
2023 N.Y. Slip Op. 1588 (N.Y. App. Div. 2023)

Opinion

No. 17569 Index No. 950231/19 Case No. 2022-01595

03-23-2023

J.D., Plaintiff-Appellant, v. The Archdiocese of New York, Defendant-Respondent, Fordham Preparatory School et al., Defendants.

Herman Law, New York (Jeffrey Herman of counsel), for appellant. Leahey & Johnson, P.C., New York (Peter J. Johnson of counsel), for respondent.


Herman Law, New York (Jeffrey Herman of counsel), for appellant.

Leahey & Johnson, P.C., New York (Peter J. Johnson of counsel), for respondent.

Before: Renwick, A.P.J., Friedman, Scarpulla, Mendez, Rodriguez, JJ.

Order, Supreme Court, New York County (George J. Silver, J.), entered on or about September 24, 2021, which granted so much of the motion of defendant The Archdiocese of New York (the Archdiocese) to dismiss the complaint as against it pursuant to CPLR 3211(a)(1), unanimously reversed, on the law, without costs, the motion denied and the complaint reinstated.

Although the deeds for the property upon which defendant Fordham Preparatory School is located and the Certificates of Incorporation for defendant USA Northeast Province of The Society Of Jesus constitute documentary evidence for the purposes of a CPLR 3211(a)(1) inquiry (see generally Yoshiharu Igarashi v Shohaku Higashi, 289 A.D.2d 128 [1st Dept 2001]), they do not conclusively resolve the allegations in the complaint that plaintiff's alleged abuser, Father Eugene O'Brien, was an agent of the Archdiocese, that the Archdiocese exercised supervision and control over Fr. O'Brien's appointment or employ, and that there were special relationships between plaintiff, the Archdiocese, and Fr. O'Brien (see Weil, Gotshal & Manges, LLP v Fashion Boutique of Short Hills, Inc., 10 A.D.3d 267 [1st Dept 2004]). The affidavit of the Associate General Counsel for the Archdiocese does not constitute sufficient documentary evidence for the purpose of a pre-answer CPLR 3211(a)(1) motion (see Johnson v Asberry, 190 A.D.3d 491 [1st Dept 2021]; Flowers v 73rd Townhouse LLC, 99 A.D.3d 431 [1st Dept 2012]). In any event, the affidavit consists mainly of legal conclusions and denials.


Summaries of

J.D. v. The Archdiocese of N.Y.

Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Mar 23, 2023
2023 N.Y. Slip Op. 1588 (N.Y. App. Div. 2023)
Case details for

J.D. v. The Archdiocese of N.Y.

Case Details

Full title:J.D., Plaintiff-Appellant, v. The Archdiocese of New York…

Court:Supreme Court of New York, First Department

Date published: Mar 23, 2023

Citations

2023 N.Y. Slip Op. 1588 (N.Y. App. Div. 2023)
183 N.Y.S.3d 851

Citing Cases

Doe v. St. Agatha Home for Children

Plaintiff moves for leave to renew is based upon the recent decision of the Appellate Division, First…

M. R. v. City of New York

Additionally, after the Court granted the Archdiocese's motion in this action, the First Department reversed…