Joyce P. v. City of Buffalo

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Joyce P. v. City of Buffalo

49 A.D.3d 1268, 852 N.Y.2d 895

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

DecidedMarch 14, 2008

StatusPublished

Cited by5 cases

This text of 49 A.D.3d 1268 (Joyce P. v. City of Buffalo) 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

Joyce P. v. City of Buffalo, 49 A.D.3d 1268, 852 N.Y.2d 895 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2008).

Pincite

Opinion

Memorandum: Supreme Court improvidently exercised its discretion in denying claimant’s application for leave to serve a late notice of claim. Although claimant “ ‘fail[ed] to offer a reasonable excuse for the delay in [serving] a notice of claim, [such delay] is not fatal where, as here, actual notice was had and there is no compelling showing of prejudice to [the respondents]’ ” (Hale v Webster Cent. School Dist., 12 AD3d 1052, 1053 [2004]; see Matter of Gilbert v Eden Cent. School Dist., 306 AD2d 925, 926 [2003]; see generally Matter of Henderson v Town of Van Buren, 281 AD2d 872, 873 [2001]). Claimant alleged in support of her application that she was sexually assaulted by respondent Greg O’Shei, a police officer employed by respondent Buffalo Police Department (Police Department), and that the last sexual assault occurred in February 2006. Claimant reported the sexual assaults to the Police Department on August 28, 2006, and respondents made no showing that they were substantially prejudiced by the delay (see Gilbert, 306 AD2d at 926-927). Present—Martoche, J.P., Lunn, Fahey, Peradotto and Pine. JJ.

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

Memorandum: Supreme Court improvidently exercised its discretion in denying claimant’s application for leave to serve a late notice of claim. Although claimant “ ‘fail[ed] to offer a reasonable excuse for the delay in [serving] a notice of claim, [such delay] is not fatal where, as here, actual notice was had and there is no compelling showing of prejudice to [the respondents]’ ” (Hale v Webster Cent. School Dist., 12 AD3d 1052, 1053 [2004]; see Matter of Gilbert v Eden Cent. School Dist., 306 AD2d 925, 926 [2003]; see generally Matter of Henderson v Town of Van Buren, 281 AD2d 872, 873 [2001]). Claimant alleged in support of her application that she was sexually assaulted by respondent Greg O’Shei, a police officer employed by respondent Buffalo Police Department (Police Department), and that the last sexual assault occurred in February 2006. Claimant reported the sexual assaults to the Police Department on August 28, 2006, and respondents made no showing that they were substantially prejudiced by the delay (see Gilbert, 306 AD2d at 926-927). Present—Martoche, J.P., Lunn, Fahey, Peradotto and Pine. JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

49 A.D.3d 1268, 852 N.Y.2d 895, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/joyce-p-v-city-of-buffalo-nyappdiv-2008.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack