From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Klingler v. State

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Mar 6, 1995
213 A.D.2d 378 (N.Y. App. Div. 1995)

Opinion

March 6, 1995

Appeal from the Court of Claims (Corbett, J.).


Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs.

In order to obtain leave to file a late claim the claimant must establish that there is some merit to the claim asserted (De Olden v. State of New York, 91 A.D.2d 1057). The claimant's unsupported opinion that her motor vehicle accident might not have happened had the State installed a traffic light at the intersection where it occurred does not suffice to establish that her claim has merit (Nyberg v. State of New York, 154 Misc.2d 199). We further note that the claimant's 9-month delay in filing her claim is not adequately excused by her physician's explanation that she had suffered, inter alia, a cerebral concussion and cervical strain for an unspecified period of time after the accident (see, e.g., Cabral v. State of New York, 149 A.D.2d 453). Santucci, J.P., Joy, Friedmann and Florio, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

Klingler v. State

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Mar 6, 1995
213 A.D.2d 378 (N.Y. App. Div. 1995)
Case details for

Klingler v. State

Case Details

Full title:IRMGARD KLINGLER et al., Appellants, v. STATE OF NEW YORK, Respondent

Court:Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department

Date published: Mar 6, 1995

Citations

213 A.D.2d 378 (N.Y. App. Div. 1995)
623 N.Y.S.2d 319

Citing Cases

Torres v. State

The State, however, is not an insurer of the safety of its roadways and the mere happening of an accident…

Schoentube v. State

he entire record, there is cause to believe that a valid cause of action exists" ( Rizzo v State of New York…