From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Matter of Drysdale v. City of New York

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Apr 28, 1992
182 A.D.2d 566 (N.Y. App. Div. 1992)

Opinion

April 28, 1992

Appeal from the Supreme Court, New York County (Martin Schoenfeld, J.).


We agree with the IAS court that defendants should be estopped from asserting the Statute of Limitations or the untimeliness of the March 12, 1990 supplemental notice of claim for wrongful death and conscious pain and suffering based upon medical malpractice because of their active concealment of plaintiff's mother's death, and their failure to reasonably and diligently inquire or ascertain the whereabouts of the decedent's relatives prior to releasing the body for a funeral to the city mortuary, although a next of kin was listed (Simcuski v Saeli, 44 N.Y.2d 442, 448; Cassidy v County of Nassau, 84 A.D.2d 742).

Nor did the IAS court err in granting plaintiff leave to serve an amended complaint setting forth more fully her allegations of fraud and concealment, where the record reveals that defendants clearly had actual knowledge of the facts underlying those claims and were therefore not substantially prejudiced by the delay in serving the notice of claim (Dodd v Warren, 110 A.D.2d 807; General Municipal Law § 50-e). We have reviewed the defendants' remaining claims and find them to be without merit.

Concur — Murphy, P.J., Ellerin, Wallach, Asch and Rubin, JJ.


Summaries of

Matter of Drysdale v. City of New York

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Apr 28, 1992
182 A.D.2d 566 (N.Y. App. Div. 1992)
Case details for

Matter of Drysdale v. City of New York

Case Details

Full title:In the Matter of CYNTHIA DRYSDALE, Respondent, v. CITY OF NEW YORK et al.…

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

Date published: Apr 28, 1992

Citations

182 A.D.2d 566 (N.Y. App. Div. 1992)
582 N.Y.S.2d 716

Citing Cases

Rivera v. City of N.Y.

roperty where the construction occurred, and that he had no way of identifying the company that performed the…

Melcher v. Greenberg Traurig, LLP

However, "[i]t is the rule that a defendant may be estopped to plead the Statute of Limitations where…