From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Castlegrande v. Mahopac Central S. Dist

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Mar 25, 2002
292 A.D.2d 604 (N.Y. App. Div. 2002)

Opinion

2001-07651

Submitted February 20, 2002.

March 25, 2002.

In a proceeding pursuant to General Municipal Law § 50-e for leave to serve a late notice of claim, the appeal is from an order of the Supreme Court, Putnam County (Hickman, J.), dated August 6, 2001, which granted the application.

Congdon, Flaherty, O'Callaghan, Reid, Donlon, Travis Fishlinger, Garden City, N.Y. (Kathleen D. Foley of counsel), for appellant.

Spain Spain, P.C., Mahopac, N.Y. (Laurie Gallo-Calistri of counsel), for respondent.

Before: GLORIA GOLDSTEIN, J.P., DANIEL F. LUCIANO, ROBERT W. SCHMIDT, and STEPHEN G. CRANE, JJ.


ORDERED that the order is reversed, on the law and as a matter of discretion, with costs, the application is denied, and the proceeding is dismissed.

In determining whether to grant leave to serve a late notice of claim, the court must consider (1) whether the petitioner demonstrated a reasonable excuse for the failure to serve a timely notice of claim, (2) whether the public corporation acquired actual knowledge of the essential facts constituting the claim within 90 days of its accrual or a reasonable time thereafter, and (3) whether the delay would substantially prejudice the public corporation in maintaining its defense on the merits (see Matter of Bergren v. Wappingers Cent. School Dist., 278 A.D.2d 492; Shapey v. East Rockaway Union Free School Dist., 277 A.D.2d 441; Matter of Morrison v. New York City Health Hosps. Corp., 244 A.D.2d 487). The Supreme Court improvidently exercised its discretion in granting the petitioner's application. The petitioner failed to demonstrate either a reasonable excuse for his delay, actual knowledge of the claim on the part of the appellant, or the absence of prejudice to the appellant.

GOLDSTEIN, J.P., LUCIANO, SCHMIDT and CRANE, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

Castlegrande v. Mahopac Central S. Dist

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Mar 25, 2002
292 A.D.2d 604 (N.Y. App. Div. 2002)
Case details for

Castlegrande v. Mahopac Central S. Dist

Case Details

Full title:IN THE MATTER OF RICHARD CASTLEGRANDE, RESPONDENT, v. MAHOPAC CENTRAL…

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

Date published: Mar 25, 2002

Citations

292 A.D.2d 604 (N.Y. App. Div. 2002)
739 N.Y.S.2d 623

Citing Cases

In re Farrell v. Bay Shore Union Free S

ORDERED that the order is reversed, on the law and as a matter of discretion, without costs or disbursements,…

In re Bergmann v. County of Nassau

ORDERED that the order is reversed, on the law and as a matter of discretion, with costs, the petition is…