Lyn v. City of New York

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Lyn v. City of New York

253 A.D.2d 859, 678 N.Y.S.2d 506, 1998 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 9834

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

DecidedSeptember 28, 1998

StatusPublished

This text of 253 A.D.2d 859 (Lyn v. City of New York) 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

Lyn v. City of New York, 253 A.D.2d 859, 678 N.Y.S.2d 506, 1998 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 9834 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1998).

Pincite

Opinion

In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, the plaintiff appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Polizzi, J.), dated June 25, 1997, which denied his motion for leave to serve an amended notice of claim and granted the defendant’s cross motion to dismiss the complaint.

Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs.

In light of, inter alia, the transitory nature of the allegedly defective condition which caused the plaintiffs accident, and his history of delay in this case, including his failure to provide the defendant with accurate and complete information concerning the date of the underlying accident until approximately 34 months after the date on which the accident occurred, the Supreme Court did not improvidently exercise its discretion in denying the plaintiffs motion for leave to serve an amended notice of claim and in granting the defendant’s cross motion to dismiss the action (see, General Municipal Law § 50-e [6]; Zapata v City of New York, 225 AD2d 543; Illera v New York City Tr. Auth., 181 AD2d 658). Bracken, J. P., Ritter, Thompson and Krausman, JJ., concur.

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

In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, the plaintiff appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Polizzi, J.), dated June 25, 1997, which denied his motion for leave to serve an amended notice of claim and granted the defendant’s cross motion to dismiss the complaint.

Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs.

In light of, inter alia, the transitory nature of the allegedly defective condition which caused the plaintiffs accident, and his history of delay in this case, including his failure to provide the defendant with accurate and complete information concerning the date of the underlying accident until approximately 34 months after the date on which the accident occurred, the Supreme Court did not improvidently exercise its discretion in denying the plaintiffs motion for leave to serve an amended notice of claim and in granting the defendant’s cross motion to dismiss the action (see, General Municipal Law § 50-e [6]; Zapata v City of New York, 225 AD2d 543; Illera v New York City Tr. Auth., 181 AD2d 658). Bracken, J. P., Ritter, Thompson and Krausman, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

253 A.D.2d 859, 678 N.Y.S.2d 506, 1998 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 9834, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/lyn-v-city-of-new-york-nyappdiv-1998.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack