Braiman v. New York City Housing Authority

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Braiman v. New York City Housing Authority

169 A.D.2d 450, 564 N.Y.S.2d 152, 1991 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 156

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

DecidedJanuary 10, 1991

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 169 A.D.2d 450 (Braiman 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

Braiman v. New York City Housing Authority, 169 A.D.2d 450, 564 N.Y.S.2d 152, 1991 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 156 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1991).

Pincite

Opinion

Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Edward H. Lehner, J.), entered June 30, 1989, which granted plaintiffs motion to serve a late notice of claim, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

Plaintiff, a passenger in a taxicab, was allegedly injured in an accident on December 28, 1988, when the taxicab collided with a vehicle driven by defendant’s employee. Although the police accident report clearly indicates that defendant’s employee was involved, plaintiff, ostensibly through inadvertence, initially served a notice of claim on the city, which informed plaintiff of her error by letter dated March 28, 1989. A notice of claim was served on defendant on April 17, 1989, and the instant motion was made on May 10, 1989, some five months after the occurrence of the accident.

The IAS court did not err in granting leave to serve a late notice of claim, given the shortness of the delay and the lack of prejudice to defendant. (Matter of Gerzel v City of New York, 117 AD2d 549.) Further, we note that defendant never denied actual notice of the accident, either as a result of notice from its employees or receipt of the police accident report. Concur—Sullivan, J. P., Milonas, Rosenberger, Wallach and Smith, JJ.

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

Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Edward H. Lehner, J.), entered June 30, 1989, which granted plaintiffs motion to serve a late notice of claim, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

Plaintiff, a passenger in a taxicab, was allegedly injured in an accident on December 28, 1988, when the taxicab collided with a vehicle driven by defendant’s employee. Although the police accident report clearly indicates that defendant’s employee was involved, plaintiff, ostensibly through inadvertence, initially served a notice of claim on the city, which informed plaintiff of her error by letter dated March 28, 1989. A notice of claim was served on defendant on April 17, 1989, and the instant motion was made on May 10, 1989, some five months after the occurrence of the accident.

The IAS court did not err in granting leave to serve a late notice of claim, given the shortness of the delay and the lack of prejudice to defendant. (Matter of Gerzel v City of New York, 117 AD2d 549.) Further, we note that defendant never denied actual notice of the accident, either as a result of notice from its employees or receipt of the police accident report. Concur—Sullivan, J. P., Milonas, Rosenberger, Wallach and Smith, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

169 A.D.2d 450, 564 N.Y.S.2d 152, 1991 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 156, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/braiman-v-new-york-city-housing-authority-nyappdiv-1991.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack