De Simone v. City of New York

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

De Simone v. City of New York

132 A.D.2d 687, 518 N.Y.S.2d 165, 1987 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 49230

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

DecidedJuly 27, 1987

StatusPublished

This text of 132 A.D.2d 687 (De Simone 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

De Simone v. City of New York, 132 A.D.2d 687, 518 N.Y.S.2d 165, 1987 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 49230 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1987).

Pincite

Opinion

In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, the plaintiff appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Bambrick, J.), dated May 6, 1986, which denied her motion, inter alia, to amend nunc pro tunc a prior order of the court (Hammer, J.), dated January 31, 1980, which, inter alia, had granted her leave to serve a late notice of claim upon the New York City Transit Authority.

Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs.

We agree with the Supreme Court, Queens County, that [688]*688since the Statute of Limitations had expired, it lacked the authority to grant the plaintiffs request to amend nunc pro tunc the prior order of the court, dated January 31, 1980 (see, Thomas v City of New York, 102 AD2d 867; cf., Lewis v New York City Tr. Auth., 100 AD2d 896). In light of the record on appeal we reach no other issues raised by the parties. Lawrence, J. P., Kunzeman, Kooper and Spatt, JJ., concur.

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

In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, the plaintiff appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Bambrick, J.), dated May 6, 1986, which denied her motion, inter alia, to amend nunc pro tunc a prior order of the court (Hammer, J.), dated January 31, 1980, which, inter alia, had granted her leave to serve a late notice of claim upon the New York City Transit Authority.

Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs.

We agree with the Supreme Court, Queens County, that [688]*688since the Statute of Limitations had expired, it lacked the authority to grant the plaintiffs request to amend nunc pro tunc the prior order of the court, dated January 31, 1980 (see, Thomas v City of New York, 102 AD2d 867; cf., Lewis v New York City Tr. Auth., 100 AD2d 896). In light of the record on appeal we reach no other issues raised by the parties. Lawrence, J. P., Kunzeman, Kooper and Spatt, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

132 A.D.2d 687, 518 N.Y.S.2d 165, 1987 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 49230, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/de-simone-v-city-of-new-york-nyappdiv-1987.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack