Baier v. City of Rochester

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Baier v. City of Rochester

98 A.D.2d 991, 470 N.Y.S.2d 248, 1983 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 21344

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

DecidedDecember 16, 1983

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 98 A.D.2d 991 (Baier v. City of Rochester) 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

Baier v. City of Rochester, 98 A.D.2d 991, 470 N.Y.S.2d 248, 1983 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 21344 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1983).

Pincite

Opinion

— Order unanimously modified by deleting therefrom the fourth ordering paragraph thereof and, as modified, affirmed, without costs. Memorandum: We find no abuse of discretion in Special Term’s decision to [992]*992grant claimant leave to file a late notice of claim where the application was only 15 days late. However, Special Term erred in ruling upon the need for prior written notice of the defect as a condition precedent to maintenance of the lawsuit. The sole issue before the court was whether a late notice of claim should be allowed. (Appeal from order of Supreme Court, Monroe County, Provenzano, J. — late notice of claim.) Present —• Dillon, P. J., Doerr, Denman, O’Donnell and Moule, JJ.

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

— Order unanimously modified by deleting therefrom the fourth ordering paragraph thereof and, as modified, affirmed, without costs. Memorandum: We find no abuse of discretion in Special Term’s decision to [992]*992grant claimant leave to file a late notice of claim where the application was only 15 days late. However, Special Term erred in ruling upon the need for prior written notice of the defect as a condition precedent to maintenance of the lawsuit. The sole issue before the court was whether a late notice of claim should be allowed. (Appeal from order of Supreme Court, Monroe County, Provenzano, J. — late notice of claim.) Present —• Dillon, P. J., Doerr, Denman, O’Donnell and Moule, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

98 A.D.2d 991, 470 N.Y.S.2d 248, 1983 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 21344, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/baier-v-city-of-rochester-nyappdiv-1983.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack