Sun v. New York City Health & Hospitals Corp.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Sun v. New York City Health & Hospitals Corp.

13 A.D.3d 151, 785 N.Y.S.2d 696, 2004 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 15064

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

DecidedDecember 14, 2004

StatusPublished

This text of 13 A.D.3d 151 (Sun v. New York City Health & Hospitals Corp.) 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

Sun v. New York City Health & Hospitals Corp., 13 A.D.3d 151, 785 N.Y.S.2d 696, 2004 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 15064 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2004).

Pincite

Opinion

Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Stanley L. Sklar, J.), entered November 28, 2003, which, inter alia, granted defendants-respondents’ motion insofar as to dismiss plaintiff mother’s claims against them, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

[152]*152Plaintiff mother did not file a timely notice of claim and did not seek leave to file a late notice of claim prior to the expiration of the applicable statutory period. Her claims against defendants-respondents were thus properly dismissed (see Hall v City of New York, 1 AD3d 254 [2003]). Contrary to plaintiffs’ argument, there do not exist the sort of exceptional circumstances upon which the Health and Hospitals Corporation defendants might be estopped from raising plaintiffs’ failure to file a timely notice of claim as a ground for dismissal (cf. Bender v New York City Health & Hosps. Corp., 38 NY2d 662 [1976]). Concur—Buckley, P.J., Andrias, Sullivan, Ellerin and Williams, JJ.

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

Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Stanley L. Sklar, J.), entered November 28, 2003, which, inter alia, granted defendants-respondents’ motion insofar as to dismiss plaintiff mother’s claims against them, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

[152]*152Plaintiff mother did not file a timely notice of claim and did not seek leave to file a late notice of claim prior to the expiration of the applicable statutory period. Her claims against defendants-respondents were thus properly dismissed (see Hall v City of New York, 1 AD3d 254 [2003]). Contrary to plaintiffs’ argument, there do not exist the sort of exceptional circumstances upon which the Health and Hospitals Corporation defendants might be estopped from raising plaintiffs’ failure to file a timely notice of claim as a ground for dismissal (cf. Bender v New York City Health & Hosps. Corp., 38 NY2d 662 [1976]). Concur—Buckley, P.J., Andrias, Sullivan, Ellerin and Williams, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

13 A.D.3d 151, 785 N.Y.S.2d 696, 2004 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 15064, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/sun-v-new-york-city-health-hospitals-corp-nyappdiv-2004.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack