Griffin v. John Jay College

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Griffin v. John Jay College

266 A.D.2d 16, 697 N.Y.S.2d 278, 1999 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 11168

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

DecidedNovember 4, 1999

StatusPublished

Cited by4 cases

This text of 266 A.D.2d 16 (Griffin v. John Jay College) 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

Griffin v. John Jay College, 266 A.D.2d 16, 697 N.Y.S.2d 278, 1999 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 11168 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1999).

Pincite

Opinion

—Order, Court of Claims, New York County (Alan Marin, J.), entered May 4, 1998, which denied the claimant’s motion to extend the time to file a late claim, unanimously reversed, on the law, the facts and in the exercise of discretion, without costs, and leave to file a late claim within 20 days of service upon claimant of a copy of this Court’s order with notice of entry granted.

In the circumstances presented, it was an improvident exercise of discretion to deny claimant’s second application for an extension of time to complete compliance with an earlier order by filing the late claim (Court of Claims Act § 10 [6]; see, Schweickert v State of New York, 64 AD2d 1026). While ignorance of the law does not excuse late filing, plaintiff had partially complied with the court’s initial order by timely serving the Attorney General, and in opposing the instant motion, the Attorney General’s office did not assert that it would be prejudiced if an additional extension was granted. Concur— Rosenberger, J. P., Tom, Mazzarelli, Saxe and Buckley, JJ.

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

—Order, Court of Claims, New York County (Alan Marin, J.), entered May 4, 1998, which denied the claimant’s motion to extend the time to file a late claim, unanimously reversed, on the law, the facts and in the exercise of discretion, without costs, and leave to file a late claim within 20 days of service upon claimant of a copy of this Court’s order with notice of entry granted.

In the circumstances presented, it was an improvident exercise of discretion to deny claimant’s second application for an extension of time to complete compliance with an earlier order by filing the late claim (Court of Claims Act § 10 [6]; see, Schweickert v State of New York, 64 AD2d 1026). While ignorance of the law does not excuse late filing, plaintiff had partially complied with the court’s initial order by timely serving the Attorney General, and in opposing the instant motion, the Attorney General’s office did not assert that it would be prejudiced if an additional extension was granted. Concur— Rosenberger, J. P., Tom, Mazzarelli, Saxe and Buckley, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

266 A.D.2d 16, 697 N.Y.S.2d 278, 1999 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 11168, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/griffin-v-john-jay-college-nyappdiv-1999.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack