Gerew v. County of Monroe

163 A.D.2d 884
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided July 13, 1990·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinions

Order reversed on the law without costs and motion denied. Memorandum: Supreme Court improvidently exercised its discretion in granting claimants’ application for leave to serve a late notice of claim against the County of Monroe because the proposed notice of claim did not meet the specificity requirement of General Municipal Law § 50-e (2) with regard to the allegation that the infant claimants were the victims of sexual misconduct during the period from May 1987 through July, 1988 when they were enrolled in the county’s Family Day Care Homes Program. [885] The County of Monroe is especially prejudiced by the fact that the dates of the alleged claims have not been set forth in the notice with the requisite degree of specificity (see, Matter of Lucy L. v County of Westchester, 149 AD2d 707, 708; Matter of Soe v County of Westchester, 142 AD2d 584, 585). Further, claimants’ allegation that the sexual misconduct occurred on September 6, 1988 may not form the basis of liability against the county because the infants were not then enrolled in the county’s Family Day Care Homes Program but were receiving child care pursuant to a private arrangement with the day care provider.

All concur, except Lawton, J., who dissents and votes to affirm, in the following memorandum.

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

Gerew v. County of Monroe, 163 A.D.2d 884 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1990).

163 A.D.2d 884 (Gerew v. County of Monroe) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Maurice W. v. Onondaga County Department of Social Services
186 A.D.2d 986 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1992)