Opinion
03-15-2017
Frank J. VETRO, appellant, v. MIDDLE COUNTRY CENTRAL SCHOOL DISTRICT, et al., respondents.
Frank J. Vetro, Miller Place, NY, appellant pro se. Miranda Sambursky Slone Sklarin Verveniotis, LLP, Mineola, NY (Michael A. Miranda, Michael T. Cataldo, and Michael A. Feinstein of counsel), for respondents.
Frank J. Vetro, Miller Place, NY, appellant pro se.
Miranda Sambursky Slone Sklarin Verveniotis, LLP, Mineola, NY (Michael A. Miranda, Michael T. Cataldo, and Michael A. Feinstein of counsel), for respondents.
In an action, inter alia, to recover damages for negligence, the plaintiff appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Suffolk County (Baisley, Jr., J.), dated October 8, 2014, which granted the defendants' motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint.ORDERED that the order is affirmed, with costs.
The Supreme Court properly granted the defendants' motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint. The defendants established their prima facie entitlement to judgment as a matter of law by demonstrating that the plaintiff's claims were time-barred (see CPLR 214[3] ; 215[3]; Education Law § 3813[2] ; General Municipal Law § 50–i[1] ; Yang v. Oceanside Union Free School Dist., 90 A.D.3d 649, 649, 933 N.Y.S.2d 905 ; cf. Drakeford v. Brooklyn Dist. Attorney, 266 A.D.2d 134, 134, 700 N.Y.S.2d 1 ). In opposition, the plaintiff failed to demonstrate the existence of a triable issue of fact as to whether the relevant statutes of limitation were tolled or were otherwise inapplicable (see Yang v. Oceanside Union Free School Dist., 90 A.D.3d at 650, 933 N.Y.S.2d 905 ).
Further, the causes of action alleging conspiracy and harassment asserted against the defendant Michelle Konik–Brosdal were properly dismissed because New York does not recognize a cause of action to recover damages for harassment (see Adeniran v. State of New York, 106 A.D.3d 844, 845, 965 N.Y.S.2d 163 ), or an independent cause of action for conspiracy to commit a tort (see Oseff v. Scotti, 130 A.D.3d 797, 799, 15 N.Y.S.3d 350 ).
In light of our determination, we need not address the parties' remaining contentions.
BALKIN, J.P., AUSTIN, SGROI and LaSALLE, JJ., concur.