Home/Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York/Bonilla v. City of New York

Bonilla v. City of New York

232 A.D.2d 597, 648 N.Y.S.2d 1005, 1996 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 11308
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided October 28, 1996·Published

Opinion

—In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, the plaintiff appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Hutcherson, J.), dated Febru[598] ary 16, 1995, which denied his motion pursuant to General Municipal Law § 50-e (6) for leave to serve an amended notice of claim.

Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs.

The Supreme Court properly denied the plaintiff’s motion to amend his notice of claim so as to include theories that were not referred to either directly or indirectly in the notice of claim (see, Wanczowski v City of New York, 186 AD2d 397; Mazzilli v City of New York, 154 AD2d 355, 357; Mojica v New York City Tr. Auth., 117 AD2d 722). Rosenblatt, J. P., Thompson, Santucci, Altman and Hart, JJ., concur.

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

Bonilla v. City of New York, 232 A.D.2d 597, 648 N.Y.S.2d 1005, 1996 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 11308 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1996).

232 A.D.2d 597 (Bonilla v. City of New York) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Mojica v. New York City Transit Authority
117 A.D.2d 722 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1986)
Mazzilli v. City of New York
154 A.D.2d 355 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1989)
Wanczowski v. City of New York
186 A.D.2d 397 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1992)