Cabezas v. City of New York

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Cabezas v. City of New York

184 A.D.2d 240

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

DecidedJune 4, 1992

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 184 A.D.2d 240 (Cabezas 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

Cabezas v. City of New York, 184 A.D.2d 240 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1992).

Pincite

Opinion

Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Stanley L. Sklar, J.), entered July 3, 1991, which granted petitioners’ motion for leave to file a late notice of claim against the municipal defendant, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

In the circumstances we find it to have been a reasonable exercise of discretion for the court to grant the application to file two months beyond the 90-day period (see, Cruz v New York City Hous. Auth., 178 AD2d 291). Petitioner Juan Cabe[241]*241zas was severely incapacitated, by the severance of his right arm. Further, we note that the defendant Housing Authority had agents and employees at the accident site who investigated and/or filed detailed reports allowing ample opportunity to examine the insulation mulching machine in question. Concur — Ellerin, J. P., Kupferman, Ross, Asch and Kassal, JJ.

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

Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Stanley L. Sklar, J.), entered July 3, 1991, which granted petitioners’ motion for leave to file a late notice of claim against the municipal defendant, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

In the circumstances we find it to have been a reasonable exercise of discretion for the court to grant the application to file two months beyond the 90-day period (see, Cruz v New York City Hous. Auth., 178 AD2d 291). Petitioner Juan Cabe[241]*241zas was severely incapacitated, by the severance of his right arm. Further, we note that the defendant Housing Authority had agents and employees at the accident site who investigated and/or filed detailed reports allowing ample opportunity to examine the insulation mulching machine in question. Concur — Ellerin, J. P., Kupferman, Ross, Asch and Kassal, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

184 A.D.2d 240, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/cabezas-v-city-of-new-york-nyappdiv-1992.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack