Every v. County of Ulster

283 A.D. 987, 131 N.Y.S.2d 201, 1954 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 6012
CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
DecidedMay 26, 1954
StatusPublished
Cited by1 cases

This text of 283 A.D. 987 (Every v. County of Ulster) 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
Every v. County of Ulster, 283 A.D. 987, 131 N.Y.S.2d 201, 1954 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 6012 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1954).

Opinion

This application involved the attempted service of a notice of claim against the County of Ulster. By a previous order this court, after reversing an order of the Ulster County Court, excused the failure of the infant claimant to serve his claim against the county within the statutory period and fixed what it deemed a reasonable time within which to serve the proposed notice of claim. (281 App. Div. 1060.) This extended time terminated on the first day of August, 1953. The claim was thereafter served within the time specified only on the County Attorney of Ulster County. That service was defective (General Municipal Law, § 50-e, subd. 3; Civ. Prae. Act, § 228). The statutes cited required the service on other county officials. The present application is for a further extension of time in which to serve the claim on all of the officers specified in the statutes. We think that our power in that regard was exhausted when we once fixed a reasonable time for the service of the claim. Some suggestion is made that the Special Term may have power to grant claimant relief under section 50-e of the General Municipal Law, or possibly upon the theory of estoppel, since the claim was actually served within the time specified upon the County Attorney and he is one of the officers required to be served under the statutes. We do not pass upon these theories. However, we call attention to the following eases: Davis v. County of Oswego (203 Mise. 80), and Matter of Martin v. School Bd. of Union Free Dist. No. 28, Long Beach (301 N. Y. 233). Application denied, without costs. Present — Foster, P. J., Bergan, Coon, Halpern and Imrie, JJ. [See 284 App. Div. 816.]

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

Related

Soules v. City of Rochester
10 A.D.2d 362 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1960)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
283 A.D. 987, 131 N.Y.S.2d 201, 1954 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 6012, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/every-v-county-of-ulster-nyappdiv-1954.