City of New York v. Port Authority of New York & New Jersey

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

City of New York v. Port Authority of New York & New Jersey

284 A.D.2d 195, 726 N.Y.S.2d 261, 2001 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 6165

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

DecidedJune 14, 2001

StatusPublished

Cited by4 cases

This text of 284 A.D.2d 195 (City of New York v. Port Authority of New York & New Jersey) 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

City of New York v. Port Authority of New York & New Jersey, 284 A.D.2d 195, 726 N.Y.S.2d 261, 2001 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 6165 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2001).

Pincite

Opinion

—Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Eileen Bransten, J.), entered May 23, 2000, which granted defendant Port Authority’s motion to dismiss the complaint for lack of subject matter jurisdiction, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

Supreme Court properly dismissed the complaint for lack of subject matter jurisdiction since plaintiff failed to comply with the specific requirements for a notice of claim against a State agency (see, McKinney’s Uncons Laws of NY § 7108 [L 1950, ch 301, § 8, as amended]; Patel v Port Auth., 184 AD2d 235). Although plaintiff urges that it substantially complied with the applicable notice of claim requirements, substantial compliance is insufficient. A proper notice of claim is a jurisdictional prerequisite of a suit against a State agency and, accordingly, defects in a notice of claim served upon a State agency may not be judicially waived where, as here, there is no statutory authority for such waiver (see, id,.). Concur — Williams, J. P., Mazzarelli, Andrias, Lerner and Saxe, JJ.

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

—Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Eileen Bransten, J.), entered May 23, 2000, which granted defendant Port Authority’s motion to dismiss the complaint for lack of subject matter jurisdiction, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

Supreme Court properly dismissed the complaint for lack of subject matter jurisdiction since plaintiff failed to comply with the specific requirements for a notice of claim against a State agency (see, McKinney’s Uncons Laws of NY § 7108 [L 1950, ch 301, § 8, as amended]; Patel v Port Auth., 184 AD2d 235). Although plaintiff urges that it substantially complied with the applicable notice of claim requirements, substantial compliance is insufficient. A proper notice of claim is a jurisdictional prerequisite of a suit against a State agency and, accordingly, defects in a notice of claim served upon a State agency may not be judicially waived where, as here, there is no statutory authority for such waiver (see, id,.). Concur — Williams, J. P., Mazzarelli, Andrias, Lerner and Saxe, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

284 A.D.2d 195, 726 N.Y.S.2d 261, 2001 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 6165, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/city-of-new-york-v-port-authority-of-new-york-new-jersey-nyappdiv-2001.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack