Ertel v. Town of Amherst

267 A.D.2d 1024, 700 N.Y.S.2d 903, 1999 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 13779
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided December 30, 1999·Published·Cited by 2 cases

Opinion

—Order unanimously affirmed without costs. Memorandum: Supreme Court did not abuse its discretion in denying claimants’ motion to file a late notice of claim. Claimants failed to establish that respondent had “notice or knowledge of the specific claim and not general knowledge that a wrong has been committed” (Matter of Sica v Board of Educ., 226 AD2d 542, 543; see, Matter of Morrison v New York City Health & Hosps. Corp., 244 AD2d 487, 488). Moreover, claimants failed to demonstrate a reasonable excuse for their failure to file a timely notice of claim (see, Winter v City of Geneva, 203 AD2d 939). (Appeal from Order of Supreme Court, Erie County, Burns, J. — Notice of Claim.) Present— Green, J. P., Lawton, Pigott, Jr., Scudder and Callahan, JJ.

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

Ertel v. Town of Amherst, 267 A.D.2d 1024, 700 N.Y.S.2d 903, 1999 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 13779 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1999).

267 A.D.2d 1024 (Ertel v. Town of Amherst) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Troutman v. Syracuse Housing Authority
35 A.D.3d 1252 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2006)
Mieux v. Alden High School
1 A.D.2d 995 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2003)