Bregman v. New York City Transit Authority

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Bregman v. New York City Transit Authority

34 A.D.2d 929, 312 N.Y.S.2d 734, 1970 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4446

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

DecidedJune 18, 1970

StatusPublished

This text of 34 A.D.2d 929 (Bregman v. New York City Transit 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

Bregman v. New York City Transit Authority, 34 A.D.2d 929, 312 N.Y.S.2d 734, 1970 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4446 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1970).

Pincite

Opinion

Order entered on January 6, 1970, granting plaintiff’s motion for leave to file a notice of claim nunc pro tunc unanimously reversed, on the law and on the facts, without costs and without disbursements, and the motion denied. Plaintiff’s accident occurred on February 1, 1969. The time to file a notice of claim expired May 2, 1969. On June 19 she applied to the court for leave to file a claim nunc pro tunc as of May 2 upon the ground that she was unable to file the claim due to her physical condition. The court denied the application with leave to renew upon a specific showing of disability. Unfortunately, her application now under review falls short of this requirement. Plaintiff was discharged from the hospital on or about February 21 and the discharge note stated she was in good condition and practically asymptomatic. Although she stayed at home, the latest date on which she was seen by a doctor appears to have been March 25. She does not meet the burden that her failure to consult counsel was due to any physical incapacity. Concur — Capozzoli, J. P., Markewich, Nunez and Steuer, JJ.

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

Order entered on January 6, 1970, granting plaintiff’s motion for leave to file a notice of claim nunc pro tunc unanimously reversed, on the law and on the facts, without costs and without disbursements, and the motion denied. Plaintiff’s accident occurred on February 1, 1969. The time to file a notice of claim expired May 2, 1969. On June 19 she applied to the court for leave to file a claim nunc pro tunc as of May 2 upon the ground that she was unable to file the claim due to her physical condition. The court denied the application with leave to renew upon a specific showing of disability. Unfortunately, her application now under review falls short of this requirement. Plaintiff was discharged from the hospital on or about February 21 and the discharge note stated she was in good condition and practically asymptomatic. Although she stayed at home, the latest date on which she was seen by a doctor appears to have been March 25. She does not meet the burden that her failure to consult counsel was due to any physical incapacity. Concur — Capozzoli, J. P., Markewich, Nunez and Steuer, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

34 A.D.2d 929, 312 N.Y.S.2d 734, 1970 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4446, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/bregman-v-new-york-city-transit-authority-nyappdiv-1970.