Alvarez v. New York City Housing Authority

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Alvarez v. New York City Housing Authority

203 A.D.2d 219, 612 N.Y.S.2d 885

CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York

DecidedApril 4, 1994

StatusPublished

Cited by3 cases

This text of 203 A.D.2d 219 (Alvarez v. New York City Housing Authority) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Alvarez v. New York City Housing Authority, 203 A.D.2d 219, 612 N.Y.S.2d 885 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1994).

Pincite

Opinion

—In a negligence action to recover damages for personal injuries, etc., the defendant appeals from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Jackson, J.), dated February 24, 1992, as granted the infant plaintiff’s application for leave to serve a late notice of claim.

Ordered that the order is affirmed insofar as appealed from, with costs.

It is well established that the question of whether to grant [220]*220an application for leave to serve a late notice of claim is left to the sound discretion of the court (see, Ortega v New York City Hous. Auth., 167 AD2d 337). Under the circumstances of this case, it cannot be said that the court improvidently exercised its discretion in granting the infant plaintiff leave to serve a late notice of claim (see, King v City of New York, 90 AD2d 714). Balletta, J. P., Rosenblatt, Ritter and Altman, JJ., concur.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

—In a negligence action to recover damages for personal injuries, etc., the defendant appeals from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Jackson, J.), dated February 24, 1992, as granted the infant plaintiff’s application for leave to serve a late notice of claim.

Ordered that the order is affirmed insofar as appealed from, with costs.

It is well established that the question of whether to grant [220]*220an application for leave to serve a late notice of claim is left to the sound discretion of the court (see, Ortega v New York City Hous. Auth., 167 AD2d 337). Under the circumstances of this case, it cannot be said that the court improvidently exercised its discretion in granting the infant plaintiff leave to serve a late notice of claim (see, King v City of New York, 90 AD2d 714). Balletta, J. P., Rosenblatt, Ritter and Altman, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

203 A.D.2d 219, 612 N.Y.S.2d 885, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/alvarez-v-new-york-city-housing-authority-nyappdiv-1994.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack