From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Sayad v. New York City Transit Authority

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Jan 26, 1998
246 A.D.2d 639 (N.Y. App. Div. 1998)

Opinion

January 26, 1998

Appeal from the Supreme Court, Kings County (Hutcherson, J.).


Ordered that the order is affirmed, without costs or disbursements.

The defendant acquired actual knowledge of the essential facts of the plaintiff's claim either within 90 days after it arose or within a reasonable time thereafter. In light of this, among other things, and the lack of prejudice to the defendant in maintaining its defense on the merits, the court did not improvidently exercise its discretion in granting the plaintiff leave to serve a late notice of claim ( see, Matter of Alvarenga v. Finlay, 225 A.D.2d 617; Pecchio v. National Safety Envtl., 211 A.D.2d 773; Matter of O'Mara v. Town of Cortlandt, 210 A.D.2d 337).

Further, because the plaintiff commenced an action against the defendant within the relevant Statute of Limitations, the court was not without authority to grant such relief ( see, General Municipal Law § 50-e; Carr v. City of New York, 176 A.D.2d 779; Ceely v. New York City Health Hosps. Corp., 162 A.D.2d 492; CPLR 304).

We have considered the defendant's remaining contentions and find them to be without merit.

Rosenblatt, J.P., Ritter, Altman and Florio, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

Sayad v. New York City Transit Authority

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Jan 26, 1998
246 A.D.2d 639 (N.Y. App. Div. 1998)
Case details for

Sayad v. New York City Transit Authority

Case Details

Full title:EDWARD SAYAD, Respondent, v. NEW YORK CITY TRANSIT AUTHORITY, Appellant

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

Date published: Jan 26, 1998

Citations

246 A.D.2d 639 (N.Y. App. Div. 1998)
666 N.Y.S.2d 955

Citing Cases

In re Mtr. Volino v. Metro. Trans. Authority

Since the Metropolitan Transportation Authority did not file any papers in opposition to the petition, it is…