McKenna v. City of New York

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

McKenna v. City of New York

154 A.D.2d 655, 546 N.Y.S.2d 660, 1989 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 13769

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

DecidedOctober 30, 1989

StatusPublished

Cited by7 cases

This text of 154 A.D.2d 655 (McKenna 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

McKenna v. City of New York, 154 A.D.2d 655, 546 N.Y.S.2d 660, 1989 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 13769 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1989).

Pincite

Opinion

— In a proceeding pursuant to General Municipal Law § 50-e (5) for leave to serve a late notice of claim, the petitioner appeals from a judgment of the Supreme Court, [656]*656Queens County (Santucci, J.), dated May 4, 1988, which denied the application.

Ordered that the judgment is reversed, as an exercise of discretion, with costs, the application is granted, and the proposed notice of claim is deemed served.

Under the circumstances of this case, where members of the New York City Police Department participated in the acts giving rise to the petitioner’s false arrest and imprisonment claims, numerous reports and complaints containing the facts essential to the petitioner’s claim had been filed with the Police Department, a portion of the delay was justified, and there is no indication that the delay will result in prejudice to the municipality, we conclude that the Supreme Court improvidently exercised its discretion in denying the application for leave to serve a late notice of claim (see, General Municipal Law § 50-e [5]; Haynes v City of New York, 100 AD2d 572; Weinzel v County of Suffolk, 92 AD2d 545). Brown, J. P., Lawrence, Kooper and Spatt, JJ., concur.

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

— In a proceeding pursuant to General Municipal Law § 50-e (5) for leave to serve a late notice of claim, the petitioner appeals from a judgment of the Supreme Court, [656]*656Queens County (Santucci, J.), dated May 4, 1988, which denied the application.

Ordered that the judgment is reversed, as an exercise of discretion, with costs, the application is granted, and the proposed notice of claim is deemed served.

Under the circumstances of this case, where members of the New York City Police Department participated in the acts giving rise to the petitioner’s false arrest and imprisonment claims, numerous reports and complaints containing the facts essential to the petitioner’s claim had been filed with the Police Department, a portion of the delay was justified, and there is no indication that the delay will result in prejudice to the municipality, we conclude that the Supreme Court improvidently exercised its discretion in denying the application for leave to serve a late notice of claim (see, General Municipal Law § 50-e [5]; Haynes v City of New York, 100 AD2d 572; Weinzel v County of Suffolk, 92 AD2d 545). Brown, J. P., Lawrence, Kooper and Spatt, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

154 A.D.2d 655, 546 N.Y.S.2d 660, 1989 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 13769, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/mckenna-v-city-of-new-york-nyappdiv-1989.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack