Brady v. City of New York

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Brady v. City of New York

258 A.D.2d 466, 683 N.Y.S.2d 531

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

DecidedJanuary 19, 1999

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 258 A.D.2d 466 (Brady v. City of New York) 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

Brady v. City of New York, 258 A.D.2d 466, 683 N.Y.S.2d 531 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1999).

Pincite

Opinion

—Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Phyllis Gangel-Jacob, J.), entered on or about October 29, 1997, which, in an action by a laborer to recover for personal injuries sustained at construction site at which defendant City was the general contractor, granted defendant’s motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

The action was properly dismissed on the ground that plaintiff’s notice of claim contained deliberately false information as to his name and address (General Municipal Law § 50-e [2]; cf., D'Alessandro v New York City Tr. Auth., 83 NY2d 891). Plaintiff will not be heard to argue that this deliberately false information did not prejudice defendant’s investigation (cf., General Municipal Law § 50-e [6]). Concur — Sullivan, J. P., Lerner, Rubin and Tom, JJ.

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

—Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Phyllis Gangel-Jacob, J.), entered on or about October 29, 1997, which, in an action by a laborer to recover for personal injuries sustained at construction site at which defendant City was the general contractor, granted defendant’s motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

The action was properly dismissed on the ground that plaintiff’s notice of claim contained deliberately false information as to his name and address (General Municipal Law § 50-e [2]; cf., D'Alessandro v New York City Tr. Auth., 83 NY2d 891). Plaintiff will not be heard to argue that this deliberately false information did not prejudice defendant’s investigation (cf., General Municipal Law § 50-e [6]). Concur — Sullivan, J. P., Lerner, Rubin and Tom, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

258 A.D.2d 466, 683 N.Y.S.2d 531, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/brady-v-city-of-new-york-nyappdiv-1999.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack