Vargas v. New York City Housing Authority

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Vargas v. New York City Housing Authority

184 A.D.2d 435, 587 N.Y.S.2d 146, 1992 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 8550

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

DecidedJune 25, 1992

StatusPublished

This text of 184 A.D.2d 435 (Vargas v. New York City Housing Authority) 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

Vargas v. New York City Housing Authority, 184 A.D.2d 435, 587 N.Y.S.2d 146, 1992 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 8550 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1992).

Pincite

Opinion

Order, Supreme Court, Bronx County (Anita Florio, J.), entered May 9, 1991, which granted petitioner’s motion for leave to file a late notice of claim, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

Under the circumstances it is clear that respondent "acquired actual knowledge of the essential facts constituting the claim” within the prescribed time and was not prejudiced by the delay (General Municipal Law § 50-e [5]; see, Matter of Beary v City of Rye, 44 NY2d 398). We also note, inter alia, that petitioner’s explanation for the delay in filing the notice of claim was adequate (see, Matter of Gerzel v City of New York, 117 AD2d 549). Concur — Carro, J. P., Ellerin, Kupferman and Asch, JJ.

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

Order, Supreme Court, Bronx County (Anita Florio, J.), entered May 9, 1991, which granted petitioner’s motion for leave to file a late notice of claim, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

Under the circumstances it is clear that respondent "acquired actual knowledge of the essential facts constituting the claim” within the prescribed time and was not prejudiced by the delay (General Municipal Law § 50-e [5]; see, Matter of Beary v City of Rye, 44 NY2d 398). We also note, inter alia, that petitioner’s explanation for the delay in filing the notice of claim was adequate (see, Matter of Gerzel v City of New York, 117 AD2d 549). Concur — Carro, J. P., Ellerin, Kupferman and Asch, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

184 A.D.2d 435, 587 N.Y.S.2d 146, 1992 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 8550, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/vargas-v-new-york-city-housing-authority-nyappdiv-1992.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack