Opinion
2014-10-15
Sacco & Fillas, LLP, Astoria, N.Y. (Si Aydiner of counsel), for appellant. Dennis M. Brown, County Attorney, Hauppauge, N.Y. (Christopher A. Jeffreys of counsel), for respondent.
Sacco & Fillas, LLP, Astoria, N.Y. (Si Aydiner of counsel), for appellant. Dennis M. Brown, County Attorney, Hauppauge, N.Y. (Christopher A. Jeffreys of counsel), for respondent.
In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, the plaintiff appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Suffolk County (Rebolini, J.), dated October 2, 2012, which granted the defendant's motion to dismiss the complaint for failure to serve a timely notice of claim pursuant to General Municipal Law § 50–e and denied her cross motion for leave to serve a late notice of claim.
ORDERED that the order is affirmed, with costs.
The plaintiff's failure to include a proposed notice of claim with the papers in support of her cross motion was a sufficient basis for denying her cross motion for leave to serve a late notice of claim ( see General Municipal Law § 50–e[7]; Matter of Scott v. Huntington Union Free Sch. Dist., 29 A.D.3d 1010, 1010, 816 N.Y.S.2d 165). Moreover, the plaintiff failed to demonstrate grounds for granting leave to serve a late notice of claim ( see Rowe v. Nassau Health Care Corp., 57 A.D.3d 961, 963, 871 N.Y.S.2d 330; Williams v. Nassau County Med. Ctr., 13 A.D.3d 363, 364, 786 N.Y.S.2d 207, affd. 6 N.Y.3d 531, 814 N.Y.S.2d 580, 847 N.E.2d 1154). Accordingly, the Supreme Court properly granted the defendant's motion to dismiss the complaint for failure to serve a timely notice of claim pursuant to General Municipal Law § 50–e, and properly denied the plaintiff's cross motion for leave to serve a late notice of claim. DILLON, J.P., HALL, AUSTIN and BARROS, JJ., concur.