Kennedy v. New York City Transit Authority

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Kennedy v. New York City Transit Authority

282 A.D.2d 653, 723 N.Y.S.2d 699, 2001 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3982

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

DecidedApril 23, 2001

StatusPublished

This text of 282 A.D.2d 653 (Kennedy 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

Kennedy v. New York City Transit Authority, 282 A.D.2d 653, 723 N.Y.S.2d 699, 2001 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3982 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2001).

Pincite

Opinion

—In an action, inter alia, to recover damages for personal injuries, the plaintiff ap[654]*654peals, as limited by his brief, from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Gavrin, J.), dated June 20, 2000, as granted the defendant’s motion to dismiss the complaint on the ground that he failed to timely serve a notice of claim.

Ordered that the order is affirmed insofar as appealed from, with costs.

The Supreme Court properly granted the defendant’s motion to dismiss the complaint on the ground that the plaintiff failed to timely serve a notice of claim (see, General Municipal Law § 50-e [1] [a]; Public Authorities Law § 1212 [2]). Further, the Supreme Court correctly determined that it could not permit service of a late notice of claim because the Statute of Limitations had expired (see, Matter of Jalloh v New York City Tr. Auth., 256 AD2d 410). Santucci, J. P., Altman, Luciano and H. Miller, JJ., concur.

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

—In an action, inter alia, to recover damages for personal injuries, the plaintiff ap[654]*654peals, as limited by his brief, from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Gavrin, J.), dated June 20, 2000, as granted the defendant’s motion to dismiss the complaint on the ground that he failed to timely serve a notice of claim.

Ordered that the order is affirmed insofar as appealed from, with costs.

The Supreme Court properly granted the defendant’s motion to dismiss the complaint on the ground that the plaintiff failed to timely serve a notice of claim (see, General Municipal Law § 50-e [1] [a]; Public Authorities Law § 1212 [2]). Further, the Supreme Court correctly determined that it could not permit service of a late notice of claim because the Statute of Limitations had expired (see, Matter of Jalloh v New York City Tr. Auth., 256 AD2d 410). Santucci, J. P., Altman, Luciano and H. Miller, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

282 A.D.2d 653, 723 N.Y.S.2d 699, 2001 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3982, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/kennedy-v-new-york-city-transit-authority-nyappdiv-2001.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack