OPINION OF THE COURT RIVERA , J. The People appeal an order by the Appellate Division that reversed a judgment by Supreme Court, vacated defendant's pleas, and dismissed the defendant's indictment without prejudice, allowing the People to re-present any appropriate charges to another grand jury ( People v Smith, 143 A.D.3d 31 [1st Dept 2016]). Contrary to the People's claim, the Appellate Division correctly determined that the trial court denied defendant's right to counsel on the...
OPINION OF THE COURT FAHEY , J. In light of the near consensus among cognitive and social psychologists that people have significantly greater difficulty in accurately identifying members of a different race than in accurately identifying members of their own race, the risk of wrongful convictions involving cross-racial identifications demands a new approach. We hold that when identification is an issue in a criminal case and the identifying witness and defendant appear to be of...
OPINION OF THE COURT Chief Judge DiFIORE . In Becker v Schwartz, this Court recognized a new cause of action permitting parents to recover the extraordinary expenses incurred to care for a disabled infant who, but for a physician's negligent failure to detect or advise on the risks of impairment, would not have been born ( 46 N.Y.2d 401 , 410 [1978]). The issue in these related appeals is whether the statute of limitations for such an extraordinary expenses claim runs from the date of...
OPINION OF THE COURT On review of submissions pursuant to section 500.11 of the Rules of the Court of Appeals (22 NYCRR 500.11), order affirmed, with costs, and certified question answered in the affirmative. Defendants Irene G. Cergnul, M.D., and Bronx-Lebanon Hospital Center did not preserve for our review their argument concerning the admissibility of the expert affidavit submitted by plaintiff in opposition to their motion for summary judgment. Moreover, defendant Bronx-Lebanon Hospital...
OPINION OF THE COURT FAHEY , J. CPLR 908 provides that "[a] class action shall not be dismissed, discontinued, or compromised without the approval of the court," and that "[n]otice of the proposed dismissal, discontinuance, or compromise shall be given to all members of the class in such manner as the court directs." On this appeal, we must determine whether CPLR 908 applies only to certified class actions, or also to class actions that are settled or dismissed before the class has been...
OPINION OF THE COURT WILSON , J. Plaintiff Michael Carlson, individually and in his capacity as administrator of his deceased wife's estate and as assignee of William Porter, commenced this action pursuant to Insurance Law 3420 (a) (2) to collect on certain insurance policies issued to DHL Worldwide Express, Inc. by National Union Fire Insurance Co. and American Alternative Insurance Co. (AAIC). Mr. Carlson previously had obtained a judgment against MVP Delivery and Logistics, Inc. and...
OPINION OF THE COURT Chief Judge DiFIORE . Criminal Procedure Law 460.10 requires an appellant to file an affidavit of errors with the criminal court in order to take an appeal from a judgment of a local criminal court if the underlying proceedings were not recorded by a court stenographer. We have already held that the filing of the affidavit of errors in this circumstance is a jurisdictional prerequisite ( see People v Smith, 27 N.Y.3d 643 , 647 [2016]). Consistent with our analysis...
OPINION OF THE COURT FAHEY , J. This appeal presents the question whether the mere commencement of an action seeking "rescission and/or reformation" of a contract constitutes an anticipatory breach of such agreement. Under the circumstances of this case, we conclude that it does not. We reverse the Appellate Division order and answer the certified question in the negative. Facts By way of background, plaintiff agreed to purchase the property in question (a developable waterfront parcel...
OPINION OF THE COURT On review of submissions pursuant to section 500.11 of the Rules of the Court of Appeals (22 NYCRR 500.11), order affirmed, with costs, and certified question answered in the affirmative. Supreme Court did not abuse its discretion in precluding defendant Julian Maurice Herman from participating in the inquest to assess damages against him. Moreover, the denial of that defendant's cross motion was proper.
OPINION OF THE COURT Per Curiam . Plaintiffs ask us to declare a constitutional right to "aid-in-dying," which they define (and we refer to herein) as the right of a mentally competent and terminally ill person to obtain a prescription for a lethal dosage of drugs from a physician, to be taken at some point to cause death. Although New York has long recognized a competent adult's right to forgo life-saving medical care, we reject plaintiffs' argument that an individual has a fundamental...
OPINION OF THE COURT FAHEY , J. Through a long, complicated, and confusing history, the litigants have struggled over the application of zoning regulations as they apply to New York City's adult entertainment industry. We hold that the City has met its burden of demonstrating that the establishments affected by its 2001 zoning amendments retained a predominant focus on sexually explicit materials or activities. It follows, under our 2005 decision in this case, that the amendments do not...
OPINION OF THE COURT MEMORANDUM. The order of the Appellate Division, insofar as appealed from, should be affirmed, with costs. Under the facts of this case, including the terms of the parties' insurance policy, which incorporated the rules of the American Arbitration Association, the issue of whether the later agreement between the parties affected the arbitrability of the dispute should be resolved by the arbitrator ( see Matter of Cassone, 63 N.Y.2d 756 [1984]; Matter of Schlaifer v...
OPINION OF THE COURT MEMORANDUM. The order of the Appellate Division should be affirmed, with costs, and the certified question answered in the affirmative. Defendants Vertical Industrial Development Corp. and Rentar Development Corp. owed plaintiff a nondelegable duty to keep the premises safe ( see Rosenberg v Equitable Life Assur. Socy. of U.S., 79 N.Y.2d 663 , 668 [1992], rearg dismissed 82 N.Y.2d 825 [1993]). Triable issues of fact exist regarding whether the security firm...
OPINION OF THE COURT RIVERA , J. Defendant John Stone principally challenges his conviction on one count of first-degree assault based on an alleged deprivation of a fair trial due to a violation of his right of confrontation. His challenge is without merit because the trial court eliminated any prejudice to defendant by striking the offending testimony from the record and instructing the jury to disregard the statements. Defendant was tried before a jury on charges arising from an...
OPINION OF THE COURT Per Curiam . Plaintiffs are three retired Supreme Court Justices certified for further service on that bench. 1 Prior to their certification, the Chief Administrative Judge signed an administrative notice declaring that the policy of the Administrative Board of the Courts of the State of New York henceforth would be that "no judge ... certificated for service as a Justice of the Supreme Court pursuant to Judiciary Law 115 may receive, concurrent with receipt of a...
OPINION OF THE COURT RIVERA , J. Plaintiff Kyle Connaughton appeals, as limited by his brief, from an Appellate Division order affirming the dismissal of his complaint under CPLR 3211 (a) (7) for failure to state a cause of action for fraudulent inducement against defendants Chipotle Mexican Grill and its Chief Executive Officer, Steven Ells. We affirm because plaintiff failed to adequately plead compensable damages. I. Plaintiff is a well-known chef who, prior to his employment with...
OPINION OF THE COURT MEMORANDUM. The order of the Appellate Division should be reversed, with costs, and defendants' motion for summary judgment denied. The record discloses triable issues of material fact that preclude summary judgment. Chief Judge DiFIORE and Judges RIVERA, STEIN, GARCIA and WILSON concur; Judge FAHEY taking no part. Order reversed, with costs, and defendants' motion for summary judgment denied, in a memorandum.
OPINION OF THE COURT MEMORANDUM. The order of the Appellate Division should be affirmed in each case. Codefendants Elmer Castillo and Brian Degraffenreid appeal from orders of the Appellate Division affirming their convictions for manslaughter in the first degree. Co-defendants' challenge to the trial court's general charge on causation is unpreserved, and there was no mode of proceedings error ( see People v Gray, 86 N.Y.2d 10 , 19 [1995]; see also People v Thomas, 50 N.Y.2d 467 , 472 [...
OPINION OF THE COURT On review of submissions pursuant to section 500.11 of the Rules of the Court of Appeals (22 NYCRR 500.11), order affirmed, with costs, and certified question answered in the affirmative. The Appellate Division correctly concluded that plaintiff failed to raise a triable issue of fact as to whether he suffered a serious left shoulder injury within the meaning of Insurance Law 5102 (d) as a result of the underlying motor vehicle accident.
OPINION OF THE COURT Chief Judge DiFIORE . Defendant was convicted, upon a jury verdict, of conspiracy in the sixth degree (Penal Law 105.00) and two counts of official misconduct (Penal Law 195.00 [1], [2]). On appeal, defendant primarily challenges his convictions on the bases of the legal sufficiency of the evidence and the fairness of the trial. We conclude that these claims lack merit and affirm the order of the Appellate Division in all respects. I. On May 19, 2009, shortly...
