From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Matter of Hernandez v. City of New York

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Mar 29, 1999
259 A.D.2d 751 (N.Y. App. Div. 1999)

Opinion

March 29, 1999

Appeal from the order of the Supreme Court, Kings County (R. Goldberg, J.).


Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs.

The petitioner's contention that he was unaware of the requirements of General Municipal Law § 50-e is not a reasonable excuse for the failure to serve a timely notice of claim ( see, Matter of Gaffney v. Town of Hempstead, 226 A.D.2d 721). The petitioner also failed to prove that the respondent, City of New York, acquired actual knowledge of the essential facts constituting the claim within the 90-day period prescribed by statute or within a reasonable time thereafter (General Municipal Law § 50-e; see, Kalenda v. Buffalo Mun. Hous. Auth., 203 A.D.2d 937). Under these circumstances, the Supreme Court did not improvidently exercise its discretion by denying the application for leave to serve a late notice of claim.

The petitioner's remaining contentions are without merit.

S. Miller, J. P., Santucci, Friedmann and Florio, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

Matter of Hernandez v. City of New York

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Mar 29, 1999
259 A.D.2d 751 (N.Y. App. Div. 1999)
Case details for

Matter of Hernandez v. City of New York

Case Details

Full title:In the Matter of JACOBO HERNANDEZ, Appellant, v. CITY OF NEW YORK…

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

Date published: Mar 29, 1999

Citations

259 A.D.2d 751 (N.Y. App. Div. 1999)
687 N.Y.S.2d 404

Citing Cases

Grant v. Nassau County Indus

The Supreme Court improvidently exercised its discretion in granting the petition. The petitioner's assertion…

Bovich v. East Meadow Public Library

And while counsel did not immediately serve a notice of claim or seek leave to serve a late notice until the…