Opinion
Submitted January 19, 2000
February 28, 2000
In a proceeding pursuant to General Municipal Law § 50-e(5) for leave to serve a late notice of claim, the petitioners appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Steinhardt, J.), dated November 5, 1998, which denied the application.
Kelner and Kelner, Mineola, N.Y. (Gail S. Kelner and Brian P. Hurley of counsel), for appellants.
Michael D. Hess, Corporation Counsel, New York, N.Y. (Margaret G. Kings of counsel; David Schechtman on the brief), for respondent.
LAWRENCE J. BRACKEN, J.P., DANIEL W. JOY, WILLIAM C. THOMPSON, GLORIA GOLDSTEIN, SANDRA J. FEUERSTEIN, JJ.
DECISION ORDER
ORDERED that the order is affirmed, with costs.
The Supreme Court providently exercised its discretion in denying the petitioners' application for leave to serve a late notice of claim on the City of New York. The injury report prepared by the injured petitioner's supervisor did not apprise the City of the nature of the claim ( see, Matter of DiBella v. City of New York, 234 A.D.2d 366), the petitioners did not offer a valid excuse for their failure to timely serve a notice of claim ( see Matter of Gilliam v. City of New York, 250 A.D.2d 680), and they offered no evidence to rebut the City's demonstration of prejudice ( see, Matter of Morrison v. New York City Health Hosps. Corp., 244 A.D.2d 487).