Christopher v. City of New York

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Christopher v. City of New York

273 A.D. 983, 78 N.Y.S.2d 403, 1948 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5592

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

DecidedApril 26, 1948

StatusPublished

This text of 273 A.D. 983 (Christopher 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

Christopher v. City of New York, 273 A.D. 983, 78 N.Y.S.2d 403, 1948 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5592 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1948).

Pincite

Opinion

Appeal from an order, as resettled, granting a rehearing of respondent’s application for leave to file a notice of claim, pursuant to the provisions of section 50-e of the General Municipal Law, and upon such rehearing granting the application. The proposed claim was based upon the alleged neglect and maltreatment of respondent while a patient in a city hospital from June 12, 1946, to July 8, 1946. Resettled order reversed on the law and the facts, without costs, and the motion denied, without costs. There was no adequate showing that the failure to serve the notice of claim within the statutory period was the result of physical or mental incapacity within the purview of subdivision 5 of section 50-e of the General Municipal Law. Moreover, the delay in making this motion until April, 1947, was not satisfactorily explained. (Matter of Ruskin v. City of New York, 271 App. Div. 934; Matter of Fabiani v. Town of North Hempstead, 272 App. Div. 1016; Matter of Blank v. City of New York, 273 App. Div. 812.) Lewis, P. J., Carswell, Johnston, Adel and Sneed, JJ., concur.

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

Appeal from an order, as resettled, granting a rehearing of respondent’s application for leave to file a notice of claim, pursuant to the provisions of section 50-e of the General Municipal Law, and upon such rehearing granting the application. The proposed claim was based upon the alleged neglect and maltreatment of respondent while a patient in a city hospital from June 12, 1946, to July 8, 1946. Resettled order reversed on the law and the facts, without costs, and the motion denied, without costs. There was no adequate showing that the failure to serve the notice of claim within the statutory period was the result of physical or mental incapacity within the purview of subdivision 5 of section 50-e of the General Municipal Law. Moreover, the delay in making this motion until April, 1947, was not satisfactorily explained. (Matter of Ruskin v. City of New York, 271 App. Div. 934; Matter of Fabiani v. Town of North Hempstead, 272 App. Div. 1016; Matter of Blank v. City of New York, 273 App. Div. 812.) Lewis, P. J., Carswell, Johnston, Adel and Sneed, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

273 A.D. 983, 78 N.Y.S.2d 403, 1948 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5592, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/christopher-v-city-of-new-york-nyappdiv-1948.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack