From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Strax v. City of New York

SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK Appellate Division, Second Judicial Department
May 29, 2019
172 A.D.3d 1381 (N.Y. App. Div. 2019)

Opinion

2015–12533 Index No. 17123/14

05-29-2019

In the Matter of Lisa R. STRAX, Appellant, v. CITY OF NEW YORK, et al., Respondents.

Lisa Strax, Whitestone, NY, appellant pro se. Zachary W. Carter, Corporation Counsel, New York, N.Y. (Fay S. Ng and Tahirih M. Sadrieh of counsel), for respondents.


Lisa Strax, Whitestone, NY, appellant pro se.

Zachary W. Carter, Corporation Counsel, New York, N.Y. (Fay S. Ng and Tahirih M. Sadrieh of counsel), for respondents.

MARK C. DILLON, J.P., HECTOR D. LASALLE, BETSY BARROS, LINDA CHRISTOPHER, JJ.

DECISION & ORDER In a proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78 to review a determination of the New York City Employees' Retirement System dated January 29, 2014, which found the petitioner's effective date of retirement to be January 24, 2014, the petitioner appeals from an order and judgment (one paper) of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Allan B. Weiss), dated October 26, 2015. The order and judgment granted the respondents' motion pursuant to CPLR 3211(a)(5) and 7804(f) to dismiss the petition, and, in effect, dismissed the proceeding.

ORDERED that the order and judgment is affirmed, without costs.

We agree with the Supreme Court's determination that the commencement of this proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78 was untimely (see CPLR 217[1] ). The petitioner did not commence the proceeding within four months of receiving the January 29, 2014, determination informing her of the effective date of her retirement (see Matter of Yarbough v. Franco, 95 N.Y.2d 342, 717 N.Y.S.2d 79, 740 N.E.2d 224 ). The petitioner's subsequent requests for reconsideration of the effective date of her retirement did not extend or toll the statute of limitations (see Matter of Mercado v. Rodriguez, 153 A.D.3d 1534, 60 N.Y.S.3d 699 ; Matter of Surton Contr. Corp. v. New York City School Constr. Auth., 81 A.D.3d 654, 916 N.Y.S.2d 157 ). In light of our determination, we need not reach the parties' remaining contentions.

DILLON, J.P., LASALLE, BARROS and CHRISTOPHER, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

Strax v. City of New York

SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK Appellate Division, Second Judicial Department
May 29, 2019
172 A.D.3d 1381 (N.Y. App. Div. 2019)
Case details for

Strax v. City of New York

Case Details

Full title:In the Matter of Lisa R. Strax, appellant, v. City of New York, et al.…

Court:SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK Appellate Division, Second Judicial Department

Date published: May 29, 2019

Citations

172 A.D.3d 1381 (N.Y. App. Div. 2019)
2019 N.Y. Slip Op. 4177
99 N.Y.S.3d 645

Citing Cases

Piliero v. Eastchester Fire Dist.

"A party seeking to assert the statute of limitations as a defense has the burden of establishing that the…

Rock v. N.Y.C. Emps.' Ret. Sys.

"If an agency has created ambiguity or uncertainty as to whether a final and binding decision has been…