- Court
- New York Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department
- Case
- Outlaw v. NYC Health + Hospitals
- Date
- June 2, 2026
- Slip Op. No.
- 2026 NY Slip Op 03394
Background
Plaintiff Debbie Outlaw asserted claims against NYC Health + Hospitals (H+H) based on events occurring in February 2022. Outlaw failed to serve a timely notice of claim on H+H within ninety days of her claim accruing, as required by General Municipal Law section 50-e(1)(a). Instead of serving H+H, the plaintiff served the notice of claim on the Comptroller of the City of New York, which is not the proper party for claims against H+H. Outlaw commenced a plenary action and separately petitioned for leave to file a late notice of claim. The defendants moved to dismiss the complaint, and the plaintiff cross-moved for leave to amend. The plaintiff also separately moved to renew her petition for leave to file a late notice of claim and to reargue. The Supreme Court, New York County, granted the defendants’ motion to dismiss, denied the plaintiff’s cross-motion to amend, denied the renewal motion, and denied the motion to reargue. The plaintiff appealed all adverse determinations.
Holding
The Appellate Division unanimously affirmed the dismissal of the complaint and denial of all of the plaintiff’s motions. The Court held that dismissal was proper because the plaintiff admittedly failed to serve the notice of claim on the correct party, H+H, within the statutory ninety-day period. The Court further held that even if the plaintiff had timely served a proper notice of claim, the complaint would still warrant dismissal because the plaintiff failed to plead that H+H owed her a special duty, as required to sustain a negligence claim against a governmental defendant. Under Ferreira v. City of Binghamton, 38 NY3d 298 (2022), a plaintiff suing a governmental entity for negligence must allege and prove the existence of a special duty running from the governmental defendant to the plaintiff, distinguishable from the general duty owed to the public at large. The plaintiff’s proposed amended complaint did not cure either deficiency.
Takeaways
Notice of claim requirements against governmental entities demand strict compliance, including service on the correct party. Service on the Comptroller does not satisfy the requirement to serve a notice of claim on NYC Health + Hospitals, which is a separate public benefit corporation. Additionally, negligence claims against governmental defendants require the plaintiff to plead and prove a special duty owed specifically to the plaintiff, not merely the general duty of care owed to the public. Failure to satisfy either of these requirements is independently fatal to the claim.
Why It Matters
Practitioners bringing claims against New York City public hospitals and health care facilities must carefully identify the correct entity on which to serve the notice of claim. NYC Health + Hospitals is not the same as the City of New York for notice purposes, and service on the City Comptroller does not satisfy the statutory requirement. Beyond the notice of claim issue, plaintiffs asserting negligence claims against governmental entities face the additional hurdle of establishing a special duty, which requires showing that the government assumed an affirmative duty to act on behalf of the particular injured party, through promises or actions directed at the individual, distinguishable from any duty owed to the public generally. Both requirements must be met, and failure to satisfy either is independently dispositive.