From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Griffin v. John Jay College

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Nov 4, 1999
266 A.D.2d 16 (N.Y. App. Div. 1999)

Opinion

November 4, 1999

Dimitri Kotzamanis, claimant-appellant.

Lew A. Millenbach, defendant-respondent.

ROSENBERGER, J.P., TOM, MAZZARELLI, SAXE, BUCKLEY, JJ.


Order, Court of Claims, New York County (Alan Marin, J.), entered May 4, 1998, which denied the claimant's motion to extend the time to file a late claim, unanimously reversed, on the law, the facts and in the exercise of discretion, without costs, and leave to file a late claim within 20 days of service upon claimant of a copy of this Court's order with notice with notice of entry granted.

In the circumstances presented, it was an improvident exercise of discretion to deny claimant's second application for an extension of time to complete compliance with an earlier order by filing the late claim (Court of Claims Act § 10 (6); see,Schweickert v. State, 64 A.D.2d 1026). While ignorance of the law does not excuse late filing, plaintiff had partially complied with the court's initial order by timely serving the Attorney General, and in opposing the instant motion, the Attorney

General's office did not assert that it would be prejudiced if an additional extension were granted.

THIS CONSTITUTES THE DECISION AND ORDER OF SUPREME COURT, APPELLATE DIVISION, FIRST DEPARTMENT.


Summaries of

Griffin v. John Jay College

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Nov 4, 1999
266 A.D.2d 16 (N.Y. App. Div. 1999)
Case details for

Griffin v. John Jay College

Case Details

Full title:MICHELE GRIFFIN, Claimant-Appellant, v. JOHN JAY COLLEGE, etc.…

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

Date published: Nov 4, 1999

Citations

266 A.D.2d 16 (N.Y. App. Div. 1999)
697 N.Y.S.2d 278

Citing Cases

Woods v. State

Additionally, defendant received a copy of the proposed claim as part of claimant's late claim motion. Thus,…

In the Matter of Yackle v. State

It is hereby ordered that the order so appealed from be and the same hereby is unanimously reversed in the…