Opinion
June 15, 1992
Appeal from the Supreme Court, Kings County (Garry, J.).
Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs.
The original notice of claim and the complaint sufficiently identify the location of the complained-of hole in the City walkway which allegedly caused the plaintiff's injury. Leave to amend was sought after the City of New York was advised of the hole in accordance with the Administrative Code of the City of New York § 7-201 (c) (2) at least 15 days before the action was commenced and after filing of a notice of claim identifying the location of the hole (see, Levine v. City of New York, 111 A.D.2d 785; Mazza v. City of New York, 112 A.D.2d 921). The proposed amendment merely enhances the description given of the place of the claimed defect and causes no prejudice to the defendant. An amendment to a notice of claim should be freely allowed where, as here, the defect or omission was made in good faith and no prejudice will result to the defendant municipality (see, Frankfort v. City of New York, 159 A.D.2d 680; Martire v. City of New York, 129 A.D.2d 567; Mazza v. City of New York, supra; Caselli v. City of New York, 105 A.D.2d 251). Thompson, J.P., Bracken, O'Brien and Santucci, JJ., concur.