Chimbo v. State

214 A.D.2d 531, 625 N.Y.S.2d 915
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided April 3, 1995·No. Claim No. 86878·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

—In a claim to recover damages for personal injuries, the claimant appeals from an order of the Court of Claims (Corbett, J.), dated September 23, 1993, which granted the defendant’s motion to dismiss his claim.

Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs.

The Court of Claims correctly determined that the notice of intention to file a claim was defective because it failed to state the nature of the claim alleged, as required by Court of Claims Act § 11 (b). Since the notice of intention to file a claim was defective, the claimant could not properly avail himself of the two-year period in which to file a claim as provided by Court of Claims Act § 10 (3) (see, DeFilippis v State of New York, 157 AD2d 826; cf., Conley v State of New York, 123 AD2d 598). Rosenblatt, J. P., Miller, Thompson and Santucci, JJ., concur.

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

Chimbo v. State, 214 A.D.2d 531, 625 N.Y.S.2d 915 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1995).

214 A.D.2d 531 (Chimbo v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Torres v. State of New York
233 A.D.2d 389 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1996)