Harold Bonilla v. City of New York

Full title: HAROLD BONILLA, Appellant, v. CITY OF NEW YORK et al., Respondents

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

Date published: Oct 28, 1996

232 A.D.2d 597 (N.Y. App. Div. 1996)

648 N.Y.S.2d 1005

Opinion

October 28, 1996.

In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, the plaintiff appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Hutcherson, J.), dated February 16, 1995, which denied his motion pursuant to General Municipal Law § 50-e (6) for leave to serve an amended notice of claim.

Before: Rosenblatt, J.P., Thompson, Santucci, Altman and Hart, JJ.

Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs.

The Supreme Court properly denied the plaintiffs motion to amend his notice of claim so as to include theories that were not referred to either directly or indirectly in the notice of claim ( see, Wanczowski v City of New York, 186 AD2d 397; Mazzilli v City of New York, 154 AD2d 355, 357; Mojica v New York City Tr. Auth., 117 AD2d 722).