Morales v. City of New York

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Morales v. City of New York

132 A.D.2d 601, 517 N.Y.S.2d 434, 1987 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 49141

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

DecidedJuly 13, 1987

StatusPublished

This text of 132 A.D.2d 601 (Morales 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

Morales v. City of New York, 132 A.D.2d 601, 517 N.Y.S.2d 434, 1987 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 49141 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1987).

Pincite

Opinion

In a proceeding for leave to file a late notice of claim, the City of New York and the Board of Education of the City of New York appeal, as limited by their brief, from so much of a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Rader, J.), dated February 18, 1986, as granted that branch of the petitioners’ application which was for leave to file a late notice of claim as to the infant petitioner’s cause of action.

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

It was a proper exercise of discretion to allow the infant petitioner to file a late notice of claim. The delay in serving the notice of claim did not substantially prejudice the appellants in this case (see, General Municipal Law § 50-e [5]). Niehoff, J. P., Lawrence, Weinstein and Kunzeman, JJ., concur.

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

In a proceeding for leave to file a late notice of claim, the City of New York and the Board of Education of the City of New York appeal, as limited by their brief, from so much of a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Rader, J.), dated February 18, 1986, as granted that branch of the petitioners’ application which was for leave to file a late notice of claim as to the infant petitioner’s cause of action.

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

It was a proper exercise of discretion to allow the infant petitioner to file a late notice of claim. The delay in serving the notice of claim did not substantially prejudice the appellants in this case (see, General Municipal Law § 50-e [5]). Niehoff, J. P., Lawrence, Weinstein and Kunzeman, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

132 A.D.2d 601, 517 N.Y.S.2d 434, 1987 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 49141, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/morales-v-city-of-new-york-nyappdiv-1987.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack