Davis v. State

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Davis v. State

39 A.D.2d 782, 331 N.Y.S.2d 535, 1972 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4704

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

DecidedMay 4, 1972

DocketMotion No. M-13447

StatusPublished

This text of 39 A.D.2d 782 (Davis v. State) 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

Davis v. State, 39 A.D.2d 782, 331 N.Y.S.2d 535, 1972 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4704 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1972).

Pincite

Opinion

Order, Court of Claims, entered on May 7, 1971, affirmed, without costs. No opinion. Staley, Jr., J. P., Sweeney and Simons, JJ., concur; Cooke and Kane, JJ., dissent and vote to reverse in the following memorandum by Kane, J. I believe that a reasonable excuse for failure to timely file the claim has been presented. Claimant’s attending physicians stated in their affidavits that he was totally disabled for a period of two months after the accident, and one doctor stated further that he was not physically or emotionally able to function normally and was unable to pursue a lawsuit or any other type of claim due to his personal injuries. These conclusions are supported by the serious injuries sustained by claimant, and provide a basis for finding that those injuries should be accepted as a reasonable excuse for not filing the claim on time (Callanan v. State of New York, 23 A D 2d 937; Stabile v. State of New York, 12 A D 2d 698; Elting v. State of New York, 8 A D 2d 640; Crofut v. State of New York, 279 App. Div. 681, affd. 303 N. Y. 897; Rugg v. State of New York, 278 App. Div. 216, revd. on other grounds 303 N. Y. 361). As to notice, the State does not claim any prejudice resulting from claimant’s delay in filing the claim. The order appealed from should he reversed.

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

Order, Court of Claims, entered on May 7, 1971, affirmed, without costs. No opinion. Staley, Jr., J. P., Sweeney and Simons, JJ., concur; Cooke and Kane, JJ., dissent and vote to reverse in the following memorandum by Kane, J. I believe that a reasonable excuse for failure to timely file the claim has been presented. Claimant’s attending physicians stated in their affidavits that he was totally disabled for a period of two months after the accident, and one doctor stated further that he was not physically or emotionally able to function normally and was unable to pursue a lawsuit or any other type of claim due to his personal injuries. These conclusions are supported by the serious injuries sustained by claimant, and provide a basis for finding that those injuries should be accepted as a reasonable excuse for not filing the claim on time (Callanan v. State of New York, 23 A D 2d 937; Stabile v. State of New York, 12 A D 2d 698; Elting v. State of New York, 8 A D 2d 640; Crofut v. State of New York, 279 App. Div. 681, affd. 303 N. Y. 897; Rugg v. State of New York, 278 App. Div. 216, revd. on other grounds 303 N. Y. 361). As to notice, the State does not claim any prejudice resulting from claimant’s delay in filing the claim. The order appealed from should he reversed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

39 A.D.2d 782, 331 N.Y.S.2d 535, 1972 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4704, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/davis-v-state-nyappdiv-1972.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack