From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Matter of King v. City of New York

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Oct 27, 1992
186 A.D.2d 497 (N.Y. App. Div. 1992)

Opinion

October 27, 1992

Appeal from the Supreme Court, Bronx County (Lewis R. Friedman, J.).


Upon review of the record, we find that the IAS Court did not abuse its discretion in denying the application to file a late notice of claim pursuant to General Municipal Law § 50-e (5) where the petitioners failed to demonstrate a reasonable excuse for the failure to serve a timely notice; failed to sustain their burden of demonstrating that the municipal respondents had acquired actual knowledge of the essential facts constituting the claims for, inter alia, false arrest, false imprisonment, malicious prosecution, and intentional infliction of emotional distress, within 90 days after the claims arose or a reasonable time thereafter; and where the delay in filing a timely notice deprived the respondents of an opportunity to investigate while the claims were fresh and information relating thereto was readily available (see, Matter of Perry v City of New York, 133 A.D.2d 692, 693).

Concur — Carro, J.P., Milonas, Ellerin and Asch, JJ.


Summaries of

Matter of King v. City of New York

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Oct 27, 1992
186 A.D.2d 497 (N.Y. App. Div. 1992)
Case details for

Matter of King v. City of New York

Case Details

Full title:In the Matter of TERRY KING, Individually and as Father and Natural…

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

Date published: Oct 27, 1992

Citations

186 A.D.2d 497 (N.Y. App. Div. 1992)
589 N.Y.S.2d 322

Citing Cases

Powell v. City of New York

The prejudice is exacerbated both by the vague and conclusory nature of petitioner's proposed notice of claim…

Matter of D'Anjou v. N.Y. City Hlt. Hosp

Hence, the notice is defective because it does not adequately set forth the nature of the claim and the time…