Irizarry v. New York City Housing Authority

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Irizarry v. New York City Housing Authority

167 A.D.2d 466, 561 N.Y.S.2d 928, 1990 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 14011

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

DecidedNovember 19, 1990

StatusPublished

Cited by3 cases

This text of 167 A.D.2d 466 (Irizarry v. New York City Housing Authority) 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

Irizarry v. New York City Housing Authority, 167 A.D.2d 466, 561 N.Y.S.2d 928, 1990 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 14011 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1990).

Pincite

Opinion

In a proceeding pursuant to General Municipal Law § 50-e (5) for leave to file a late notice of claim, the appeal is from an order of the [467]*467Supreme Court, Kings County (Golden, J.), dated May 9, 1989, which granted the application.

Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs.

In granting the petitioner’s application for leave to serve a late notice of claim, the Supreme Court did not exercise its discretion in an abusive or improvident manner. Considering all of the circumstances revealed in the affidavits submitted to the court, including the fact that the New York City Housing Authority had actual notice of the occurrence upon which the petitioner’s claim is based, and was not prejudiced by the delay, we see no reason to substitute our discretion for that of the Supreme Court (see generally, Matter of Ziecker v Town of Orchard Park, 70 AD2d 422, affd 51 NY2d 957; Rice v New York City Hous. Auth., 149 AD2d 495; Wolf v State of New York, 140 AD2d 692; Whitehead v Centerville Fire Dist., 90 AD2d 655; cf., Gagliardi v New York City Hous. Auth., 88 AD2d 610). Mangano, P. J., Bracken, Lawrence and Kunzeman, JJ., concur.

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

In a proceeding pursuant to General Municipal Law § 50-e (5) for leave to file a late notice of claim, the appeal is from an order of the [467]*467Supreme Court, Kings County (Golden, J.), dated May 9, 1989, which granted the application.

Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs.

In granting the petitioner’s application for leave to serve a late notice of claim, the Supreme Court did not exercise its discretion in an abusive or improvident manner. Considering all of the circumstances revealed in the affidavits submitted to the court, including the fact that the New York City Housing Authority had actual notice of the occurrence upon which the petitioner’s claim is based, and was not prejudiced by the delay, we see no reason to substitute our discretion for that of the Supreme Court (see generally, Matter of Ziecker v Town of Orchard Park, 70 AD2d 422, affd 51 NY2d 957; Rice v New York City Hous. Auth., 149 AD2d 495; Wolf v State of New York, 140 AD2d 692; Whitehead v Centerville Fire Dist., 90 AD2d 655; cf., Gagliardi v New York City Hous. Auth., 88 AD2d 610). Mangano, P. J., Bracken, Lawrence and Kunzeman, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

167 A.D.2d 466, 561 N.Y.S.2d 928, 1990 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 14011, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/irizarry-v-new-york-city-housing-authority-nyappdiv-1990.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack