Scarzfava v. City of Newburgh

255 A.D.2d 436, 680 N.Y.S.2d 595, 1998 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 11994
CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
DecidedNovember 16, 1998
StatusPublished
Cited by5 cases

This text of 255 A.D.2d 436 (Scarzfava v. City of Newburgh) 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
Scarzfava v. City of Newburgh, 255 A.D.2d 436, 680 N.Y.S.2d 595, 1998 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 11994 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1998).

Opinion

—In an action, inter alia, to recover damages for injury to property, the defendant appeals from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Orange County (Peter C. Patsalos, J.), entered August 18, 1997, which, after a nonjury trial, and upon an order of the same court dated July 15, 1997, which, inter alia, denied its motion, in effect, to dismiss the complaint based upon the plaintiffs failure to serve a timely notice of claim, is in favor of the plaintiff and against it in the principal sum of $22,742.

Ordered that the judgment is reversed, on the law, with costs, the order dated July 15, 1997, is vacated, the motion is granted, and the complaint is dismissed.

The Supreme Court erred in denying the defendant’s motion to dismiss the complaint. The record establishes that “the happening of the event upon which the claim [was] based” (General Municipal Law § 50-i [1]) was the City’s alleged negligent failure to supervise the installation of a sewer line by the Town of Newburgh in 1988 (see, Klein v City of Yonkers, 53 NY2d 1011; Johnson v Marianetti, 202 AD2d 970; Pleasant Ridge Townhouses Homeowners’ Assn. v T & D Constr. Corp., 181 AD2d 871; Nebbia v County of Monroe, 92 AD2d 724). When measured from the date of that occurrence, the plaintiffs service of his notice of claim was untimely (see, Nicholas v City of New York, 130 AD2d 470; cf., Flanagan v Board of Educ., 47 NY2d 613; Badgett v New York City Health & Hosps. Corp., 227 AD2d 127). Ritter, J. P., Thompson, Santucci and Joy, JJ., concur.

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

Related

Demasi v. Dutchess County Department of Public Works
101 A.D.3d 668 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2012)
Liston v. Town of Newburgh
90 A.D.3d 861 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2011)
Town of Philipstown v. Garrison Contracting, Inc.
85 A.D.3d 1014 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2011)
Princess Video, Inc. v. City of New York
277 A.D.2d 300 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2000)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
255 A.D.2d 436, 680 N.Y.S.2d 595, 1998 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 11994, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/scarzfava-v-city-of-newburgh-nyappdiv-1998.