Johnsen v. Nissman

39 A.D.2d 578, 331 N.Y.S.2d 796, 1972 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4896
CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
DecidedApril 17, 1972
StatusPublished
Cited by8 cases

This text of 39 A.D.2d 578 (Johnsen v. Nissman) 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
Johnsen v. Nissman, 39 A.D.2d 578, 331 N.Y.S.2d 796, 1972 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4896 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1972).

Opinion

In a proceeding pursuant to article 78 of the CPLR, respondents appeal from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County, entered October 27, 1971, directing respondents to accept for filing, petitioner’s untimely claim for compensation under article 22 of the Executive Law [Crime Victims Compensation Board]. Judgment reversed on the law, without costs, and petition dismissed. It is not disputed by any of the parties to this proceeding that petitioner's claim for compensation under article 22 of the Executive Law was not made until some 3% years after the occurrence. This is not within the time limitation prescribed by subdivision 2 of section 625. The legislative history of this chapter makes it clear that the filing provisions of that section were intended to operate with the same effect as those contained in section 50-e of the General Municipal Law with respect to the filing of notices of claim against the State and its political subdivisions. Consequently, petitioner’s claim is barred from consideration by the respondent board by subdivision 2 of section 625 and no other provision of law or consideration of justice can operate to toll its application. Compensation awards under article 22 of the Executive Law are “a matter of grace” (Executive Law, § 620). The law creates no enforceable legal right and no cause of action accrues. Thus, the tolling provisions of CPLR 208 have no application. Latham, Acting P. J., Shapiro, Gulotta, Brennan and Benjamin, JJ., concur.

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

Related

Rosa v. Jones (In Re Jones)
144 B.R. 242 (N.D. New York, 1992)
Opn. No.
New York Attorney General Reports, 1982
Claim of Gryziec v. Zweibel
74 A.D.2d 9 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1980)
White v. Violent Crimes Compensation Board
388 A.2d 206 (Supreme Court of New Jersey, 1978)
Renta v. Van Rensselaer
54 A.D.2d 796 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1976)
Criminal Injuries Compensation Board v. Gould
331 A.2d 55 (Court of Appeals of Maryland, 1975)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
39 A.D.2d 578, 331 N.Y.S.2d 796, 1972 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4896, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/johnsen-v-nissman-nyappdiv-1972.