Opinion
April 15, 1994
Appeal from the Supreme Court, Erie County, Doyle, Jr., J.
Present — Denman, P.J., Balio, Fallon, Doerr and Davis, JJ.
Order unanimously reversed on the law without costs, motion denied, cross motion granted and complaint dismissed. Memorandum: The IAS Court abused its discretion in granting plaintiff's motion for leave to file a late notice of claim. Defendant did not acquire actual knowledge of the essential facts constituting the claim within 90 days after the claim arose or within a reasonable time thereafter (see, General Municipal Law § 50-e). Knowledge of the facts constituting the claim is the factor that "should be accorded great weight" (Matter of Stenowich v Colonie Indus. Dev. Agency, 151 A.D.2d 894, 895, lv denied 74 N.Y.2d 615; see, Matter of Morris v County of Suffolk, 88 A.D.2d 956, affd 58 N.Y.2d 767). Notice to the City of Buffalo cannot be deemed constructive notice to defendant, which is an independent agency unrelated to the City of Buffalo (see, Pavone v City of New York, 170 A.D.2d 493; Gagliardi v New York City Hous. Auth., 88 A.D.2d 610; McKay v City of New York, 126 Misc.2d 290). Finally, plaintiff has not alleged that the condition resulting in his accident has remained unchanged and, absent such an allegation, defendant has not been given an opportunity to investigate the condition at the time of the accident (see, Fendig v City of New York, 132 A.D.2d 520).