Spanos v. Town of Oyster Bay

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Spanos v. Town of Oyster Bay

23 A.D.2d 881, 259 N.Y.S.2d 917, 1965 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4173

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

DecidedMay 17, 1965

StatusPublished

This text of 23 A.D.2d 881 (Spanos v. Town of Oyster Bay) 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

Spanos v. Town of Oyster Bay, 23 A.D.2d 881, 259 N.Y.S.2d 917, 1965 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4173 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1965).

Pincite

Opinion

In a proceeding by an infant pursuant to statute (General Municipal Law, § 50-e, subd. 5), for leave to serve a late notice of claim for damages for personal injury, the infant appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Nassau County, entered December 18, 1964, which denied the application. Order reversed on the facts and in the exercise of discretion, with $10 costs and disbursements; and application granted. In our opinion, it was an abuse of discretion to deny leave to serve a late notice of claim in this case (Matter of Dow v. New York City Housing Auth., 22 A D 2d 696; Matter of Pandoliano v. New York City Tr. Auth., 17 A D 2d 951). Ughetta, Acting P. J., Hill and Benjamin, JJ., concur; Christ and Rabin, JJ., concur in the result, but adhere to the views expressed by them in their dissent in Matter of Pandoliano v. New York City Tr. Auth. (17 A D 2d 951) and to the views expressed by the Appellate Division, First Department in Matter of Goglas v. New York City Housing Auth. (13 A D 2d 939, affd. 11 N Y 2d 680).

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

In a proceeding by an infant pursuant to statute (General Municipal Law, § 50-e, subd. 5), for leave to serve a late notice of claim for damages for personal injury, the infant appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Nassau County, entered December 18, 1964, which denied the application. Order reversed on the facts and in the exercise of discretion, with $10 costs and disbursements; and application granted. In our opinion, it was an abuse of discretion to deny leave to serve a late notice of claim in this case (Matter of Dow v. New York City Housing Auth., 22 A D 2d 696; Matter of Pandoliano v. New York City Tr. Auth., 17 A D 2d 951). Ughetta, Acting P. J., Hill and Benjamin, JJ., concur; Christ and Rabin, JJ., concur in the result, but adhere to the views expressed by them in their dissent in Matter of Pandoliano v. New York City Tr. Auth. (17 A D 2d 951) and to the views expressed by the Appellate Division, First Department in Matter of Goglas v. New York City Housing Auth. (13 A D 2d 939, affd. 11 N Y 2d 680).

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

23 A.D.2d 881, 259 N.Y.S.2d 917, 1965 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4173, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/spanos-v-town-of-oyster-bay-nyappdiv-1965.