Fornabaio v. City of New York
This text of 41 A.D.3d 125 (Fornabaio 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.
Opinion
Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Doris Ling-Cohan, J.), entered January 26, 2006, which, to the extent appealed from, on renewal of a prior order, granted the petition to serve a late notice of claim, unanimously reversed, on the law, without costs, the motion to renew and the petition denied.
The motion court lacked discretion to grant petitioner leave to file a late notice of claim, since his reargument/renewal motion was made 12 days after the one-year-and-90-day limitations period had expired (Matter of Goffredo v City of New York, 33 AD3d 346, 347 [2006]). Nor is such an untimely motion permitted to relate back to the date when the originally timely motion [126]*126was made (id. at 348; accord Matter of Asaro v City of New York, 167 AD2d 130 [1990], lv dismissed 77 NY2d 956 [1991]). Moreover, denial of leave is warranted because the record before us is devoid of any suggestion that the New York City Housing Authority bears liability for petitioner’s injury (Williams v City of New York, 290 AD2d 354 [2002]). Concur—Tom, J.P., Mazzarelli, Williams, McGuire and Kavanagh, JJ.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
41 A.D.3d 125, 837 N.Y.S.2d 88, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/fornabaio-v-city-of-new-york-nyappdiv-2007.