Briggs v. City of Geneva

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Briggs v. City of Geneva

130 A.D.2d 942, 516 N.Y.S.2d 139, 1987 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 46918

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

DecidedMay 22, 1987

StatusPublished

Cited by3 cases

This text of 130 A.D.2d 942 (Briggs v. City of Geneva) 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

Briggs v. City of Geneva, 130 A.D.2d 942, 516 N.Y.S.2d 139, 1987 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 46918 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1987).

Pincite

Opinion

Order unanimously modified, on the law, and as modified, affirmed, without costs, in accordance with the following memorandum: Special Term erred in denying claimants’ motion pursuant to General Municipal Law § 50-e (5) for leave to serve a late notice of claim. At the time of the accident the defendant’s chief operator of the sewage treatment plant was present on the site and directed traffic so that the injured claimant could be taken to the hospital. This afforded defendant actual knowledge of the essential facts constituting the claim (see, e.g., Mestel v Board of Educ., 90 AD2d 809; Matter of Ziecker v Town of Orchard Park, 70 AD2d 422, affd 51 NY2d 957). As defendant had actual knowledge of the claim and has not suffered substantial prejudice by the delay, claimants’ motion to serve a late notice of claim is granted (see, Matter of Beary v City of Rye, 44 NY2d 398, 412-413). (Appeals from order of Supreme Court, Ontario County, Fritsch, J.— late notice of claim.) Present—Callahan, J. P., Denman, Boomer, Pine and Lawton, JJ.

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

Order unanimously modified, on the law, and as modified, affirmed, without costs, in accordance with the following memorandum: Special Term erred in denying claimants’ motion pursuant to General Municipal Law § 50-e (5) for leave to serve a late notice of claim. At the time of the accident the defendant’s chief operator of the sewage treatment plant was present on the site and directed traffic so that the injured claimant could be taken to the hospital. This afforded defendant actual knowledge of the essential facts constituting the claim (see, e.g., Mestel v Board of Educ., 90 AD2d 809; Matter of Ziecker v Town of Orchard Park, 70 AD2d 422, affd 51 NY2d 957). As defendant had actual knowledge of the claim and has not suffered substantial prejudice by the delay, claimants’ motion to serve a late notice of claim is granted (see, Matter of Beary v City of Rye, 44 NY2d 398, 412-413). (Appeals from order of Supreme Court, Ontario County, Fritsch, J.— late notice of claim.) Present—Callahan, J. P., Denman, Boomer, Pine and Lawton, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

130 A.D.2d 942, 516 N.Y.S.2d 139, 1987 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 46918, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/briggs-v-city-of-geneva-nyappdiv-1987.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack