White v. City of New York

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

White v. City of New York

277 A.D.2d 1124

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

DecidedDecember 4, 1950

StatusPublished

This text of 277 A.D.2d 1124 (White 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

White v. City of New York, 277 A.D.2d 1124 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1950).

Pincite

Opinion

In an action to recover damages for wrongful death, order permitting plaintiff to serve a notice of claim later than sixty days after his appointment as administrator and directing that such service be deemed nunc pro tunc as within the sixty-day period, reversed on the law, without costs, and the motion denied, without costs. Under section 50-e of the General Municipal Law, prior to amendment (L. 1950, eh. 481), the plaintiff, as administrator, had a period of sixty days from the time of his appointment to serve a notice of claim. He is not one within the purview of subdivision 5 of section 50-e relating to those as to whom the court, in discretion, may extend the time of service. (Matter of Mulligan v. County of Westchester, 272 App. Div. 927; Mulligan v. City of New York, 273 App. Div. 152.) Nolan, P. J., Carswell, Johnston, Adel and Sneed, JJ., concur.

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

In an action to recover damages for wrongful death, order permitting plaintiff to serve a notice of claim later than sixty days after his appointment as administrator and directing that such service be deemed nunc pro tunc as within the sixty-day period, reversed on the law, without costs, and the motion denied, without costs. Under section 50-e of the General Municipal Law, prior to amendment (L. 1950, eh. 481), the plaintiff, as administrator, had a period of sixty days from the time of his appointment to serve a notice of claim. He is not one within the purview of subdivision 5 of section 50-e relating to those as to whom the court, in discretion, may extend the time of service. (Matter of Mulligan v. County of Westchester, 272 App. Div. 927; Mulligan v. City of New York, 273 App. Div. 152.) Nolan, P. J., Carswell, Johnston, Adel and Sneed, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

277 A.D.2d 1124, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/white-v-city-of-new-york-nyappdiv-1950.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack