Opinion
July 6, 1992
Appeal from the Supreme Court, Westchester County (Donovan, J.).
Ordered that the order is reversed, on the law, with costs, and the motion is denied.
The plaintiff's motion for leave to serve a late notice of claim was not made until after the expiration of the applicable Statute of Limitations. Hence, the motion was untimely as a matter of law and, absent a finding of equitable estoppel, the Supreme Court lacked the authority to grant the motion (see, General Municipal Law § 50-e; Pierson v. City of New York, 56 N.Y.2d 950; Matter of Adams v. City of New York, 180 A.D.2d 629; Siahaan v. City of New York, 123 A.D.2d 620). Contrary to the plaintiff's contention and the Supreme Court's determination, the record is devoid of evidence suggesting that the third-party defendants engaged in any misleading conduct so as to support a finding of equitable estoppel in this case (see, Luka v. New York City Tr. Auth., 100 A.D.2d 323, affd 63 N.Y.2d 667; Hochberg v City of New York, 99 A.D.2d 1028, affd 63 N.Y.2d 665; Matter of Rieara v. City of New York Dept. of Parks Recreation, 156 A.D.2d 206; Siahaan v. City of New York, supra; Matter of Gross v. New York City Health Hosps. Corp., 122 A.D.2d 793). Accordingly, the court erred in granting the plaintiff's motion. Bracken, J.P., Sullivan, O'Brien and Ritter, JJ., concur.