Johnson v. New York City Transit Authority

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Johnson v. New York City Transit Authority

278 A.D.2d 83, 717 N.Y.S.2d 580, 2000 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 13060

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

DecidedDecember 14, 2000

StatusPublished

Cited by5 cases

This text of 278 A.D.2d 83 (Johnson v. New York City Transit 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

Johnson v. New York City Transit Authority, 278 A.D.2d 83, 717 N.Y.S.2d 580, 2000 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 13060 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2000).

Pincite

Opinion

Order, Supreme Court, Bronx County (Douglas McKeon, J.), entered August 26, 1999, which, upon the grant of reargument and renewal, granted plaintiffs motion for permission to file a late notice of claim and deemed such notice of claim timely served nunc pro tunc, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

Since defendant was in receipt of an incident report and an aided report worksheet, filled out by the police officer who responded to the accident scene, it had, from the outset, notice of the facts upon which plaintiffs claim is premised and accordingly has not been prejudiced by plaintiffs delay. This being the case, the motion court exercised its discretion properly in granting plaintiff permission to file a late notice of claim (see, Matter of Cicio v City of New York, 98 AD2d 38, 39-40). Concur — Sullivan, P. J., Rosenberger, Williams, Ellerin and Andrias, JJ.

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

Order, Supreme Court, Bronx County (Douglas McKeon, J.), entered August 26, 1999, which, upon the grant of reargument and renewal, granted plaintiffs motion for permission to file a late notice of claim and deemed such notice of claim timely served nunc pro tunc, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

Since defendant was in receipt of an incident report and an aided report worksheet, filled out by the police officer who responded to the accident scene, it had, from the outset, notice of the facts upon which plaintiffs claim is premised and accordingly has not been prejudiced by plaintiffs delay. This being the case, the motion court exercised its discretion properly in granting plaintiff permission to file a late notice of claim (see, Matter of Cicio v City of New York, 98 AD2d 38, 39-40). Concur — Sullivan, P. J., Rosenberger, Williams, Ellerin and Andrias, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

278 A.D.2d 83, 717 N.Y.S.2d 580, 2000 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 13060, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/johnson-v-new-york-city-transit-authority-nyappdiv-2000.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack